Any chance to call Tango as Extended Standard Library

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

Don wrote:
> <small rant>
> I completely disagree. I think the two libraries is a disaster. I can 
> see that so many people have been exposed to a lifetime of propaganda 
> that "competition is a good thing", but it's just propaganda. 
> Competition inevitably means wasted effort, and it's obvious in D.
> </small rant>

Well I've been exposed to "competition is wasted effort" for the first 
19 years of my life, and believe me, you wouldn't want to be subjected 
to that :o). But, I hear your point.

> Note, however that the gulf between Phobos and Tango mostly exists in 
> I/O; and C++ also has two I/O packages (the one inherited from C, and 
> the awful iostreams). So I don't think this is a big a problem as 
> stated. If we work at it, we could move the difference to be entirely a 
> I/O difference. But that would require willingless to do it, and I'm not 
> sure that it's really there.
> 
> <big rant>
> In my attempt to bring both libraries together I have experienced 
> reactions from both sides which appeared hostile (or at least reluctant) 
> to a merger. Apart from Sean and myself, I don't see much evidence that 
> people actually want them to merge. They just want the other one to 
> disappear.
> </big rant>

Well then you better start naming names :o). As far as yours truly is 
concerned, it's a good thing to be able to work on a library that meshes 
well with the power of D2. In many ways it's a dream language (sometimes 
literally so...), and it ought to come with a dream library.


Andrei