Any chance to call Tango as Extended Standard Library

[Don]

John Reimer wrote:
> Hello Johan,
> 
> 
>> As a user of D primarily and of the standard libraries secondly I see
>> this reluctance to solve the library situation as the single biggest
>> threat to D. It creates a division in the community and an uncertainty
>> of which library to base my own libraries on. If I use one and the
>> other wins the competition I have to redo a lot of work. It's also a
>> headache when distributing code as I don't know which functions and
>> packages I can assume exists.
>>
> 
> 
> I hear you.   But the argument against this would probably be that you 
> would not have to redo all your work... you just start integrating the 
> use of the other (more popular) library in your work (since they have 
> common runtimes). While this is convenient, yet it would seem to be 
> cumbersome.  Now projects will have dependencies on both full libraries 
> including the libary that falls from favour (if that in fact happens). 
> 
> On the other hand, it wouldn't be so bad if one of Tango or Phobos 
> became a 3rd-party/extension library (more suitably this should be 
> Tango), in which case it would seem more natural and familiar to use it 
> as an addon to the other library.
> 
> 
> -JJR
> 
> 
The other option (which I would prefer) is for druntime to get bigger, 
and encompass more of the common code from both. So that both Phobos and 
Tango became (crucial) extension libraries over a small core. And the 
bigger that common core becomes, the smaller the library problem becomes.