Migrating D front end to D - post Dconf

[Dmitry Olshansky]

11-May-2013 22:15, Daniel Murphy пишет:
>> If we aren't confident that we can write and maintain a large real-world
>> application in D just yet, we must pull the emergency brakes on the whole
>> DDDMD effort, right now.
>>
>> David
>
> I'm confident in D, just not in phobos.  Even if phobos didn't exist, we'd
> still be in better shape using D than C++.  What exactly are we going to
> need from phobos?  sockets?  std.datetime? std.regex? std.container?
>

Sockets may come in handy one day. Caching compiler daemon etc.
std.container well ... mm ... eventually.

> If we use them in the compiler, we effectively freeze them.  We can't use
> the new modules, because the old toolchains don't have them.  We can't fix
> old broken modules because the compiler depends on them.  If you add code to
> work around old modules being gone in later versions, you pretty much end up
> moving the source into the compiler after all.
>

I propose a different middle ground:

Define a minimal subset of phobos, compilable and usable separately.
Then full phobos will depend on it in turn (or rather contain it). 
Related to my recent thread on limiting inter-dependencies - we will 
have to face that problem while make a subset of phobos.

It has some operational costs but will limit the frozen surface.

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky