Tango vs Phobos

Koroskin Denis 2korden at gmail.com
Mon Aug 11 09:03:29 PDT 2008


On Sun, 10 Aug 2008 13:18:20 +0400, Lars Ivar Igesund  
<larsivar at igesund.net> wrote:

> Nick B wrote:
>
>> Sean
>>
>> So what is the plan to transition Tango to D2.0 ?
>>
>> Is the Tango team waiting for const to be removed from D2.0, or will
>> Tango continue to use D1.0 forever, or is the team waiting to see the
>> final form of D2.0 before deciding what to do ?
>
> We don't expect const to be removed :) As it is, this must be resolved
> before it is possible to properly port Tango:
>
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2267
>
> 1644 was fixed now, but is in our opinion the lesser solution to the
> problem - we'd much rather have 1961.
>
> 2204 is still open I think.
>
> Also as long as closures are allocated on stack, that is likely to be  
> rather
> detrimental to the performance.
>
> Once we have a resolution on that, work on the Tango D 2.0 branch will
> probably continue, and this branch will be available to all who need it.  
> If
> possible, an official release may happen shortly after the time Walter
> calls D 2.0 to be stable.
>
> One other concern is that it is almost impossible to have code that is  
> both
> D1 and D2 compatible, something which mean the mantainance of two  
> branches,
> a potentially daunting task - it would be good if the "syntactical
> correctness" restriction on versioned out blocks could be removed for at
> least D1/D2 identifiers.
>

We need some other kind of `version' for this, I'm afraid. Something like  
this, maybe:

#version (StructInsteadOfClass)
    struct Foo {
#else
    class Foo {
#end
        void bar() {}
    }



More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list