Tango vs Phobos

Sean Kelly sean at invisibleduck.org
Thu Aug 14 10:55:29 PDT 2008


Nick B wrote:
> Sean Kelly wrote:
>> == 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.
>>
> 
> Can you explain what you mean by a "unsupported release" ?

For example, Tango currently provides guarantees about hidden memory 
allocations -- ie. it doesn't perform any, really.  But with the new 
closure rules in D2 we can't provide the same guarantee without a 
redesign.  So I'd consider Tango on D2 to be unsupported because it 
won't be able to provide the guarantees we provide on D1 without a 
rewrite, which we aren't planning on doing.

> Do you mean that all bugs will not fixed or only a certain sub-set of 
> bugs ?

See above.  I wouldn't consider these bugs per se, just documented behavior.


Sean



More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list