Phobos vs Tango! What's your opinion?

[Deewiant]

Dan wrote:
> As I just said in a different thread.  Tango has this OO gleam in it's eye.
> It's implementing classes for the craziest of things.  Strings don't need a
> class!  Implementing a class to store an array is *hugely* wasteful.
> 

>From what I understand, the string class in Tango is handy because it handles
Unicode text on the code point level. Thus you don't need to worry about whether
it's in UTF-8, -16, or -32, and how this affects stuff like slicing.

Of course, there's still the problem of combining characters and ligatures.

> Classes are the Microsoft Windows of the programming world; opague, costly,
> slow, and they have burdensome licensing.

I don't quite agree with this, but I do prefer free functions in many cases. I
can accept having a File class for "heavy-duty" file handling, but I still find
myself missing a simple function for just dumping an ubyte[] array of a file's
contents.

The "problem" is that Tango is currently just so much *better* than Phobos,
idioms aside.

-- 
Remove ".doesnotlike.spam" from the mail address.