A suggestion to D community

[Chris R. Miller]

Graham St Jack wrote:
>> Yes, it is. But I think the most important is that the Tango group and
>> Phobos cooperate about the core. Because if the third one do this things
>> would be very hard. Because of Phobos is in developing and Tango is in
>> developing too. So if we seperate the core from Phobos and Tango, and
>> then Phobos and Tango is based on the Core, then they can working
>> together. This will be a great success in the D community.
> 
> I absolutely agree. Having a single core is essential. 

And this would give the opportunity to improve the core.  For example, 
what about pluggable garbage collectors?  So you could change the GC 
type, perhaps not at runtime, but at least have more say into the GC 
technique used.  It might also give more people a chance to work on GC 
technique if it were an easy plugin architecture.  I know I've felt the 
wanderlust to try my hand at GC programming.

Disclaimer: I know next to nothing about GC implementation.

Moving onward, that would also allow us to take parts of Phobos and 
Tango that coincide and put them into the new core, consolidating the 
implementations into one location, perhaps unifying the libraries in the 
distant future and ending the "Tango vs. Phobos" """"Discussions"""" 
once and for all?  I am unsure, but it's a possibility to consider.