DIP80: phobos additions

[weaselcat via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 8 June 2015 at 01:39:33 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Monday, 8 June 2015 at 00:05:58 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
>> can we discuss the downside of making phobos huge?
>>
>> I actively avoid adding phobos libs to my projects because it 
>> bloats my binaries and increases compile times by massive 
>> amounts.
>
> Andrei has already stated that we are definitely going to make 
> Phobos large. We are _not_ going for the minimalistic approach, 
> and pretty much no other language is at this point either. So, 
> Phobos _will_ continue to grow in size.
>
> Now, as Adam points out, we can should do a better job of 
> making it so that different pieces of Phobos don't depend on 
> each other if they don't need to, but it's a given at this 
> point that Phobos is only going to get larger. And if 
> unnecessary dependencies are kept to a minimum, then it really 
> shouldn't hurt your compilation times (and I'm sure that we'll 
> have further compiler improvements in that area anyway).
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

I wasn't arguing against a large library(in fact, I prefer it.) I 
just think the effort should be put towards making phobos more 
modular before adding more stuff on top of it and making the 
problem worse.
bye,