obsolete D libraries/modules

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 8/31/13 11:12 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2013-08-31 19:11, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>
>> Haven't seen Tango's arguments parser, but it's a given getopt can be
>> improved in any number of ways. Yet the way I see it, with command line
>> parsing, the margin between a good enough argument parser and a terrific
>> one is razor thin. One parses arguments by definition once in every
>> program, and things like checking against limits and constraints across
>> multiple arguments can be easily done after basic parsing.
>
> I don't want this to start a huge argument about Tango versus Phobos.
> But Tango supports this _now_, out of the box, Phobos doesn't. No need
> to do any post processing. It's that simple.

I agree with the sentiment, but not with the example. It's just petty. 
There's no out-of-the-box vs it-could-be-built, it's just a difference 
without a distinction. We're talking about a few lines per application.

> Again I don't understand why some people having so much trouble that
> some developers here are using Tango.

In this case you're seeing things where they aren't. Speaking only for 
myself I think Tango is a fine library and I'm glad it's keeping 
traction in D.


Andrei