Humble request at Walter: Could you _please_ fix phobos already?

[Clay Smith]

downs wrote:
> I don't like Tango. Going by looks and usability alone, I'd far prefer 
> to use Phobos. However, sometimes I run into trouble with Phobos, like 
> sockets being broken in interesting ways, the connect function not being 
> synchronized, lack of templates in std.string .. I'm sure many of you 
> have had similar experiences.
> Those are not unbelievably complex and hard issues (like, for example, 
> Macros) but mostly rather trivial things that could be fixed with a few 
> lines of code.
> So I really have to ask - why are these issues not being fixed? Why is 
> it that in a post-1.0 project, which should be largely bug-free and 
> feature complete, I still have to debug the _standard library_?
> When writing code, there are a few basic assumptions that you have to 
> make for the sake of efficiency, like what your tools are telling you is 
> correct. That the standard library works as advertised is one of those 
> assumptions. Why is it, that in a post-1.0 project, important parts of 
> the GC, like generationalCollect, even though they are explicitly 
> mentioned in the documentation, remain unimplemented?
> I really like D, and I also like Phobos. I think it would be sad if 
> people who don't even particularly _like_ Tango would be pushed towards 
> using it by problems that could have been solved.
>  --downs
> 
> PS: In a similar vein, some people have observed that longstanding bugs 
> seem to be getting less attention these days. Perhaps it would be .. 
> wise, before going off and adding new features which in turn introduce 
> new bugs, to fix the old ones first?

I'd rather have Walter work on compiler bugs than standard library issues.

I think the best solution would be for Walter to put phobos in an SVN 
and give 1 or 2 trusted D community members commit access so they can 
merge user patches etc. while Walter simply concentrates on the compiler.