Tango vs Phobos

[Sean Kelly]

== Quote from bearophile (bearophileHUGS at lycos.com)'s article
> Sean Kelly:
> > I would prefer that the old behavior the the default and that "new &fn"
> > or something similar would be used for full closures.
> We have already discussed why this is negative, when practically possible in D the default has to be
the "safer" version (what "safer" is can be debated).

It's just a matter of opinion, I suppose.  As D is a systems language, I don't
agree with many arguments about safety when that safety conflicts with my
ability to control what the language is doing behind the scenes.  Portability
between versions is also an issue--code that is correctly designed for D 1.0
may be unusable on D 2.0 because the default behavior for certain language
features is different, although the syntax is still completely legal.  Also, there
isn't any way to easily grep for the use of delegates so finding such trouble
spots requires a manual code review.

Because one of Tango's core design goals was to have no hidden allocations,
this behavior is a major concern for me because it forces me to choose
between elegant algorithm design (which works fine in D 1.0) and a design
that's portable between language versions in a way I find acceptable.  I think
if/when Tango is ever released for D 2.0 necessity may dictate that it be an
unsupported release for reasons such as this.


Sean