Phobo's migration

[H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d]

On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 08:57:47AM -0400, Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 6/23/16 8:31 AM, Jack Stouffer wrote:
[...]
> > Phobos is "obviously" production ready as it's being used in
> > production at many companies https://dlang.org/orgs-using-d.html
> > 
> > So companies are willing to build their infrastructure on D because
> > they have determined that it's ready for there uses. But we've had a
> > similar argument before; IIRC you brought up something about toy
> > languages in use in companies.
> 
> I don't mean this as disproof, but many companies are not using
> Phobos, even though they use D.
> 
> Sociomantic definitely does not (they use D1 currently, and their D2
> port probably uses a port of their library as well), and I believe
> Weka.io does not either.

AFAIK, the reason Sociomantic doesn't use Phobos is because their
codebase started with D1, and D1 Phobos was pretty sucky. Of course, now
that they have built their own library, it's hard to switch to D2
Phobos, because the current Phobos has quite a different design from
before and would entail too big of a code change.


> Again, this isn't proof that Phobos isn't production ready. It depends
> on what you need, and whether Phobos satisfies that need.
[...]

Just out of curiosity, do we know which companies are definitively using
Phobos in production?

I do use Phobos extensively in my own projects, but currently none are
"production" projects. (Mainly because there is a lot of resistance in
my day job against anything that isn't plain old C. Sigh.)  Most of
Phobos is actually quite handy, though the older, crufty modules are
annoying (like std.xml, std.json, that badly need an up-to-date
replacement).


T

-- 
Stop staring at me like that! It's offens... no, you'll hurt your eyes!