Polishing D - suggestions and comments

[Jesse Phillips]

On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 20:33:23 -0800, Kris wrote:

> - You said "entire library infrastructure is based on classes", with
> perhaps a vague implication that's what Tango is about. This would be
> entirely false information, with the potential to mislead others. Phobos
> also has a number of classes, apparently in about the same ratio as
> Tango

I would have to say that I have had the same perception as Dan here. From 
a general glance, Tango looks like it is solely class based. My choice 
not to use Tango was made back in its initial release dates. I have 
fallowed general discussion regarding Tango, but never felt the need/
desire to switch. This has been changing though, there have been times I 
wish I was coding in Tango because of something it provided. As such I 
will be happy to be switching over once my book arrives.

I would like to also state my opinion on the Standard Library matter 
(coming from someone that hasn't used Tango). Tango should be standard. I 
don't think Phobos should die, but in general it looks like Tango has 
taken the lead. This is not to say that the one with the most features 
wins, but the one that is getting the most project support. Dsource is 
being filled with Tango based code; even ports from Phobos code bases. In 
my view the D language contributors have spoken, Tango is the library to 
use in development.

Maybe, Phobos can be the dmd test bed library. You know for all the rapid 
changes that happen during alpha/beta.