why a part of D community do not want go to D2 ?

[Andrew Wiley]

On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 4:00 PM, bearophile <bearophileHUGS at lycos.com>wrote:

> Eric Poggel:
>
> > On 11/10/2010 3:16 PM, dsimcha wrote:
> > > Don't make it a class if it can be a free
> > > function.
> >
> > I agree with most of the others except for this one.
>
> Object oriented programming is a way to think about code, so it may come
> more natural to you, or less natural, according to the way you think (often
> your first language matters a lot. If your first language was OOP then
> probably objects are more natural for you).
>
> But in the end OOP was invented to face problems present in larger
> programs. OO is infrastructure that adds some complexity to reduce
> complexity in larger programs. It's not wise to add complexity unless it's
> necessary. So using a class where a free functions is enough may be
> over-engineering.


One thought here:
If Tango is still useful in the D world but there isn't too much enthusiasm
about porting it to D2, why not break its functionality (that isn't already
in Phobos 2) down into a set of supplemental libraries that can be included
as needed? This would seem to give the best of both worlds because there is
no longer a runtime split, the functionality and APIs provided by Tango is
still available as needed, and porting becomes something that can easily be
done incrementally.
Thoughts? Criticisms? Denunciations?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20101110/f92c0e2f/attachment.html>