Standard Library Concerns (Phobos / Tango)

[Tim Burrell]

Darryl Bleau wrote:
> +1. Ideally though, the tangobos compatibility layer would be dropped
> entirely, as I feel that it's existence would still introduce confusion
> to new users. The current situation would remain nearly the same, except
> that the standard library would simply include this 'other' standard
> library layer... (this would make me scratch my head, were I new to D).
> There would still be a separation in code like there is today, except
> we'd have tangobos/tango versus phobos/tango.

A good point.  I believe you're correct... now that I think about it, it
may be best not to go this way.  Replacing inconsistency for another
kind of inconsistency isn't necessarily the greatest option.

> A separately available tangobos whose intended function is to aid in
> moving legacy phobos apps to tango would make more sense, imo, than
> giving that layer persistence in the new standard lib.

A great suggestion.  Agreed.