Give me a break

[Tom S]

Don wrote:
> Tom S wrote:
>> Lutger wrote:
>>> Tom S wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yigal Chripun wrote:
>>> (snip)
>>>>> IMHO, the Tango vs. Phobos licensing issue is the biggest bikeshed 
>>>>> color
>>>>> problem in the D realm and the only people that can solve it are the
>>>>> tango devs and walter and co. of which Neither are willing to budge.
>>>> Uhhh... try listening to Tango folks sometimes. They really have tried.
>>>>
>>>
>>> If you can forgive my ignorance, what is the current Tango/Phobos 
>>> problem you see and refer to here? Is it related to D1 or also 
>>> concerns a possible  future Tango D2?
>>
>> I'm mostly a Tango user, not its developer, so I might be misinformed, 
>> but there doesn't seem to be any licensing issue except a conceptional 
>> one.
> 
> Not true. The issue is that Tango uses the BSD license, which is 
> inappropriate for a standard library. Phobos2 now uses the Boost license 
> throughout. Because of the licensing issue, Andrei and Walter won't look 
> at any Tango code.
> This could be fixed quite simply by adding the Boost license to the list
> of Tango licenses (it should replace BSD in my opinion).

BSD is just one of two options for Tango. What's wrong with AFL v3.0?
http://dsource.org/projects/tango/wiki/License


> The next biggest issue is module naming.

Ouch :D I'll back away from that one quickly.


>> As for other issues - there's very little communication between the 'D 
>> Team' and the 'Tango Team'. Much could be learned and borrowed from 
>> it, but you don't see that in Phobos 2. Looks like we're going to end 
>> up with two 'utility libraries' that are not compatible with one 
>> another and instead of complementing each other, they offer ways to do 
>> the same things in a slightly different manner.
> 
> Most of the competing functionality is with parts of Phobos which are 
> going to be ditched, eg the I/O system.
> In Phobos2, everything will be range-based -- and that introduces a 
> conceptual difference. (much like the STL in C++ vs the C libraries).

How much is 'most' here? Modules like base64, bigint, boxer/variant, 
conv, date utils, filesystem ops, regex, traits, utf/unicode contain a 
lot of duplicate work.


> The big issue will be, how far can Tango2 go in integrating Phobos2 
> concepts while retaining as much of Tango1 as possible?
> 
>>
>> IIRC, Tango devs claim that its runtime is better than druntime, which 
>> also only supports DMD at the moment. And apparently, there's been 
>> very little contact with Sean lately, so it's a case of 'us' vs 'them' 
>> again.
> 
> The Phobos2 runtime _is_ the Tango runtime. That problem has been fixed.

Unless a merger has been done quite recently, it _was_.


-- 
Tomasz Stachowiak
http://h3.team0xf.com/
h3/h3r3tic on #D freenode