Polishing D - suggestions and comments

Jarrod qwerty at ytre.wq
Thu Jan 31 05:29:35 PST 2008


On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 22:34:43 -0800, Kris wrote:

> "Jarrod" <qwerty at ytre.wq> wrote in message
> news:fnh54c$2utd$1 at digitalmars.com... [snip]
>> from what I've seen you seem to be very strongly against any form of
>> it.
> 
> That's just not the case. Anyone at the D conference would probably
> verify that <g>
>
>
>> If Tango was made because Phobos was in tatters in the past, then what
>> is the motivation now?
> 
> Forgive me, but I have to ask if you know much about the Tango library? 
> I mean, how long have you used it for? It's really not my goal to simply
> contradict your points (which are all good questions, btw), but there is
> rather a lot of supposition being expressed about Tango today <g>

I don't read up on the history of a library, I'm merely an end user. I 
find it odd you think using the library for longer would change my 
knowledge of Tango's design goals particularly in relation to Phobos.
I just see the situation for how it currently is:
Two completely different core libraries. Bad.
Pretty simple issue. Apparently, not simple to solve though.


>> Phobos is once again moving along nicely. Why can't the Tango team help
>> it advance?
> 
> Given that phobos is currently adopting code from Tango, how did you
> arrive at this supposition about the Tango team?

Many people claim that windows originally stole its GUI ideas from mac. 
Are you saying mac helped develop windows?
To answer your question more directly, I arrived at this supposition by 
simply noting Tango and Phobos are of course still separate, and both are 
in active development with different teams backing them.


As a side note, and probably a closing note since this horse has been 
thoroughly beaten with no real resolve; I have to agree with others who 
have posted in this thread. At a glance, the IO routines of Tango give me 
horrible Java flashbacks. After rubbing my eyes and taking a closer look, 
I guess they liken a bit more to C++ streams.
They don't really have easy to remember names (Conduits. Lolwut?) and I 
find it's hard to remember (or even understand) their relationship with 
one another.
There also seems to be a lot of different stream types and this makes it 
more confusing to follow and remember.
Overall, the IO Stream (uh I mean Conduit.. or do I?) usage isn't exactly 
difficult, but I can't say it's a pleasure either.



More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list