A suggestion to D commulity 2

[Rayne]

Saaa Wrote:

> 
> "Rayne" <DiscipleRayne at gmail.com> wrote in message 
> news:gaqtb1$855$1 at digitalmars.com...
> > Yonggang Luo Wrote:
> >
> >> It's seems that most hard things to geting Phobos and Tango working 
> >> together is that the "object.d" is different. Because everything is 
> >> derived from "object.d", so if we want to geting Phobos and Tango working 
> >> together, we must do a hudge refactoring. But we have to do, because of 
> >> Phobos and Tango will be larger and larger. And there is such a day, we 
> >> must geting Phobos and Tango working together, it's be a very hard thing 
> >> to do.
> >>
> >> And we have another choice, that give up Phobos or Tango, leave one 
> >> library as the stardard! But i think this would be harder.
> >
> > Your starting to get annoying with this "have to do" this "have to do" 
> > that bullshit, no one has to do anything there is no real big reason to 
> > make them compatible with each other, if it's not important and it's not 
> > no one is going to care.
> 
> Having one library would be easier.
> 
> >
> > And there is a standard libary already, phobos,
> I agree.
> 
> >why discontinue tangos because it's the standard?
> As I read it he is stating that it is a possibility to drop one of the two 
> libraries.
> 
> >Simply because you don't want to be tempted into using tango?
> I read no preference for phobos in the post.
> 
> >Your really not making any sense.
> He thinks that merging two libraries together will become harder the larger 
> they become.
> 
> 
> 

Both libarys are useful, and they both offer different features that could be locked into either libary with a little work. I never said he prefered phobos, but I was making a point, hes stating there should only be one libary for D, as in (drop tango/phobos and go with <insert libary here>.

I don't see why having one libary would be easier, you already have one libary you just get to choose between them, I think it's nice to have an alternate choice of libary.