A betterC modular standard library?

[Temtaime via Digitalmars-d]

On Sunday, 18 December 2016 at 09:26:09 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko 
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Who is interested in betterC _modular_* standard library?
> I am planing to make libmir org a community for it.
> Thought and concerns?
>
> We already have better `cpuid` and better `random` packages. 
> The betterC std.range and std.algorithm analogs would be 
> released with new ndslice implementation. Mir's algorithm would 
> be faster then Phobos and will generate less template bloat. 
> Then lightweight threads, multithread GLAS, matrix inversion. 
> Fastest I/O and http2 ...
>
> (they all are betterC modular libraries)
>
> Andrei and probably 90% of existing D users don't want Phobos 
> to move this direction.
>
> In other hand I need a commercial attractive D infrastructure 
> for large and heavy system projects. There is no commercial 
> perspective for me to contribute to Phobos because:
>
> 1. Phobos version depends on compiler version. Delay with LDC 
> release is too large. It should / can be one day.
>
> 2. We can not do hot fixes in Phobos without compiling and 
> deploying patched libphobos. Mir's DUB package are much more 
> flexible.
>
> 3. Dependencies should be clear. Modularity is a proper way for 
> large std library. In phobos everything integrated with 
> everything. DRuntime -> Phobos abstraction is weird for betterC 
> because system modules can depends universal algorithms, but 
> universal algorithm are more portable if they have not system 
> dependencies.
>
> 4. Phobos does not provide and will not provide betterC 
> guaranties. If something works for betterC mode now it may not 
> work in the future release.
>
> [1] https://github.com/libmir/
> * - separate github/DUB libraries with clear dependencies.
>
> Best regards,
> Ilya

Let's write a D, phobos.
Then we drop all the features and use a BetterC mode.
Then we write all modules against betterC mode.