D and the world

[Sean Kelly]

David B. Held wrote:
> 
> On some level, I agree that "It's the Library, Stupid!" (to paraphrase a 
> former President).  However, I disagree that it's *just* the library...I 
> think it is how the library is constructed.  I think the next revolution 
> in software engineering will be highly configurable and extensible 
> libraries, which will tend to obsolete the large collections of 
> redundant libraries we have today. 

I very much agree.

> Because designing a highly 
> configurable library is fundamentally different from designing a 
> concrete library, I don't think there is much to be gained by simply 
> making every C++ or C or X library available in D.

Well, no.  But there's a lot to be said for being able to exploit tested 
and established libraries "for free."  And it's possible to wrap C 
libraries to make them easier to use, etc.

> I think projects like Tango and TioPort are good, because these 
> foundational services are necessary for bootstrapping.

For what it's worth, Tango is intended to be as modular as possible, 
even at the bootstrapping level.  I am sure that more could be done to 
make the library more generic, but D templates have only recently become 
sufficiently robust to build a production quality library with them.  I 
think it will take some time for new techniques to be found and for 
libraries to be modified to exploit new features.  Personally, I am 
planning to wait for macros and such to be released before giving it 
much serious thought.

 > And I don't
> think copying the STL to make the DTL was the right way to go.  D offers 
> metaprogramming facilities far and above what C++ allows.  The true 
> power of D will become apparent when DTL is resurrected with the full 
> power of D's metaprogramming system brought to bear.

Yup.  I think DTL was more an early proof of concept than anything.  It 
has the beginning of some very promising ideas, but would require a full 
rewrite to be truly useful for D today.



Sean