Monorepo?

[Iain Buclaw]

On Tuesday, 14 February 2023 at 12:46:33 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
> On Tuesday, 14 February 2023 at 10:24:36 UTC, Mathias LANG 
> wrote:
>> What we will mostly loose by having a monorepo is a visible 
>> interface between core language and standard library. The 
>> interface will be less apparent, and easier to break. We have 
>> very concrete evidence that this is something that leads to 
>> problems (Tango/Phobos), and the separation exists today 
>> because of this.
>>
>
> [1]
>
>> In recent meetings, Walter complained that the DMD test suite 
>> depends on Phobos, and he's right. Fixing this problem would 
>> alleviate some of the issues you're describing it. LDC fixed 
>> that issue, and I think GDC did too, but DMD didn't yet.
>
> [2]
>
> I would like to point our that [2] is concrete evidence that 
> [1] clearly is not solved by the use of separate repos.

They are not in any way related.  Having phobos in the same repo 
as dmd does not make [2] go away. The lament being made is that 
Phobos is being built before running the testsuite, not that 
Phobos is in a separate repo.

Regarding [1], I know the reference, however it's not clearly 
spelled out.  D used to be maintained in one repository, it 
nearly killed the language. In the most pessimistic outlook, the 
split took the wind out of D's sails, and left the language 
permanently on the horizon. The end result of the fallout being 
druntime got removed from phobos, severing any ties between core 
and standard runtime libraries so that the likes of Tango or 
Ocean could co-exist with D compiler/core.