Standard Library Concerns (Phobos / Tango)

[Robert Fraser]

Ameer Armaly wrote:
> "Tim Burrell" <tim at timburrell.net> wrote in message 
> news:fochd0$30te$1 at digitalmars.com...
>> Hey all,
>>
>> It seems that even though Phobos is open source, it's difficult for
>> people to contribute to.  Patch submissions aren't being accepted as
>> readily as they should be, and bugs remain even months after having a
>> fix submitted by users.
>>
>> Not to mention that it's confusing for new users to have to deal with
>> two standard libraries.  I think it would be a really good thing for the
>> language as a whole if there were only one standard library.
>>
>> My personal opinion is that Walter should let go of Phobos and adopt
>> Tango as the official standard library.  I know there are people out
>> there that prefer the Phobos API over Tango's, but I have a feeling that
>> if Walter asked the Tango people to maintain the Tangobos base as the
>> official standard library for D they would be okay with that.
>>
>> It would be a win-win situation for everyone, including Walter.  His
>> time would get to be spent more on D itself, as he would likely only
>> need to oversee the standard library in terms of input regarding the API
>> and patchset accepts.
>>
>> The community would gain a huge win because there would only be one
>> unified standard library.
>>
>> Phobos users would still be able to use the Phobos API but would gain
>> the benefits of using an API that they feel they can contribute to, and
>> that has a proven track record of being responsive to fixing bugs.
>> They'd also gain the ability to use the odd Tango class when desired.
>>
>> And Tango users wouldn't have to deal with using a non-standard library
>> as the basis for their app, plus the ability to use the odd bit of the
>> Phobos API would be nice now and again as well.
>>
>> I really feel strongly that a move toward a single standard library is
>> the right thing to do for D.  There's very few cons to such a move and a
>> great many pros.
>>
>> Anyone else have any thoughts on the matter?
>>
> If we can get a systemm for accepting submitions to Phobos going, what if we 
> made Tango a sort of expansion pack on top of it? I.E. Phobos addresses all 
> the basic stuff, and Tango ditches all its standard library-ish code and 
> becomes the "extended library" if you will. The way I see it the standard 
> library should be fairly comprehensive without going in to actual nitches; 
> that ought to be left to whatever expansion pack we put together. Thoughts?
> 
> It's good to be back by the way; getting settled at college can take a while 
> with classes and the like.
>> Tim. 
> 
> 

Bad thought. Tango's IO model, in particular, is very different and IMO, 
much better/faster. On the other hand, the C feel of Phobos's IO is more 
comfortable for some people, and making that a bunch of wrapper 
functions is no better, since then you have two APIs for one thing.