Phobos is now on dsource

[renoX]

Robert Fraser a écrit :
> Peter C. Chapin wrote:
>> A large standard library bulks up the language (where by "language" I
>> mean the actual programming language plus its standard library
>> facilities). Such bulk is undesirable in places where it isn't needed,
>> such as embedded systems or other small scale environments.
> 
> Then why does Java thrive in such environments, i.e. cell phones, etc.? 
> (okay, J2ME is a bit smaller than J2SE, but it's a far cry bigger than 
> the C stdlib)
> 
> IMHO, the bigger the standard library, the better in most cases. 
> Standard library code is well-reviewed and tested, so you can generally 
> count on it more than 3rd party libraries, open source or not. Arguably 
> more importantly, having a standard way of doing things makes code more 
> consistent, reducing incompatibilities and portability issues. Further, 
> if everyone knows the standard library (or a piece of it), a new 
> developer can join the team and be instantly familiar with how to craft 
> their code, and what the existing code does, without reading extensive 
> documentation.

Agreed. The bigger (in scope) the standard library will be, the better: 
Java and Perl success are directly linked to the breadth of their 
'standard library'.

For embedded purpose: D itself is not suitable to 16bit CPU, so it'd be 
at least 32bit CPU, and the current standard library with its GC usage 
is already not suited either to very small memory targets.

So for embedded targets where D can be useful I think that a standard 
library the size of Java's one would be ok.

I hope that many parts of Tango will be added to Phobos but being 
carefully made coherent with Phobos 'style'.

renoX