Jason House wrote:
> Maybe this is the type of thing that should be done as some kind of poll... Something that asks d users which standard library setups they're ok with.
> phobos
> tango
> tango+tangobos
> tango + phobos (two standards)
> 
> With mass participation and some real numbers to support hunches, it may be easier to encourage action by others.  Personally, I'd vote for tango or tango+tangobos.  My port to Tango (last year) was relatively painless except for I/O.

Good Call!  Poll created! (see my post regarding Standard Library Poll)

Tim.

Darryl Bleau wrote:
> +1. Ideally though, the tangobos compatibility layer would be dropped entirely, as I feel that it's existence would still introduce confusion to new users. The current situation would remain nearly the same, except that the standard library would simply include this 'other' standard library layer... (this would make me scratch my head, were I new to D). There would still be a separation in code like there is today, except we'd have tangobos/tango versus phobos/tango.

A good point.  I believe you're correct... now that I think about it, it may be best not to go this way.  Replacing inconsistency for another kind of inconsistency isn't necessarily the greatest option.

> A separately available tangobos whose intended function is to aid in moving legacy phobos apps to tango would make more sense, imo, than giving that layer persistence in the new standard lib.

A great suggestion.  Agreed.

Tomas Lindquist Olsen wrote:
> D1/Phobos1 needs to be taken out of Walters hands. He doesn't care about it, even though it's the version of D with the largest userbase. If he cared he would reply to this thread as well as the countless others before it (on the same topic).

You do realize you're posting just two hours after the original post in this thread?  Apparently Walter needs to have a constant eye on the group and hair-trigger response in order to show you he cares....

- --Joel

>> D1/Phobos1 needs to be taken out of Walters hands. He doesn't care about it, even though it's the version of D with the largest userbase. If he cared he would reply to this thread as well as the countless others before it (on the same topic).
> 
> You do realize you're posting just two hours after the original post in this thread?  Apparently Walter needs to have a constant eye on the group and hair-trigger response in order to show you he cares....

I don't think anyone was saying that.  Whether or not it's true, it appears that a good deal of the D community feels that Walter isn't concerned about what users of his language think.  Obviously this isn't the only time issues have been brought forth that the community feels one way about that go unanswered and ignored.

I would say though that I think your response is justified... finger pointing isn't the way to go here.

I would never chastise Walter for not responding within a certain time, but it would be nice to get his opinion on the matter.  If he says "too bad guys, you feel one way, but it's my language and this is how it's gonna be." then that would be nice to know!  Maybe he has a master plan that we don't know about.  I'm open to hearing anything from him, but silence on matters that the community cares about isn't a good way to lead, and whether or not he likes it, by virtue of beign D's creator Walter is a leader.

Tim Burrell, el  6 de febrero a las 11:47 me escribiste:
> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> > Exactly the same feeling.
> > 
> > Maybe GDC could make the step and provide tango as the standard library. If successful, I guess DMD will follow that path.
> 
> Honestly, I'd take this over no action, as it might spur Walter to follow suit, but it could actually end up being another a step backward for the language... then instead of two compilers and two competing standard libraries we've got two competing compilers that ship with different standard libs.  Ie, even more confusion for people new to the language!

If tangobos complies with phobos, is not a "different stantdard library" it's a different *implementation* of the standard library (and some additions, the tango API).

> I think it would go a long way if there could be some official action on this on Walter's part.

I think you missed the compatibility layer premise. If the new implementation is backward compatible, what's the long way?

-- 
Leandro Lucarella (luca) | Blog colectivo: http://www.mazziblog.com.ar/blog/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145  104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cuanta plata que aquí circula y yo que ando con gula...
	-- Sidharta Kiwi

Joel C. Salomon wrote:
> Tomas Lindquist Olsen wrote:
>> D1/Phobos1 needs to be taken out of Walters hands. He doesn't care about it, even though it's the version of D with the largest userbase. If he cared he would reply to this thread as well as the countless others before it (on the same topic).
> 
> You do realize you're posting just two hours after the original post in this thread?  Apparently Walter needs to have a constant eye on the group and hair-trigger response in order to show you he cares....
> 
> --Joel

I was going to say the same thing, until I realized that his judgment of 'care' was likely referencing the threads included in 'the countless others before' and not this specific thread.

downs:
>I prefer Phobos' structure to Tango,

I agree. So maybe this too is an issue to be addressed. I mean some of the current structure of Tango my be changed a bit, before adopting it as the std lib. I think this too is a worthy discussion topic.


Tomas Lindquist Olsen:
> D1/Phobos1 needs to be taken out of Walters hands.

If you talk like that I think Guido Van Rossum too would not answer much :-) I think you have to be much more gentle, etc.

Bye,
bearophile

>> Vote in favor, not that it matters.
>>
>> I prefer Phobos' structure to Tango, however it remains a simple fact that Tango is technically superior and better maintained.
>
> You stole my words. I vote in favour too, if that matters.

Vote++;

bearophile wrote:
> downs:
>> I prefer Phobos' structure to Tango,
> 
> I agree. So maybe this too is an issue to be addressed. I mean some of the current structure of Tango my be changed a bit, before adopting it as the std lib. I think this too is a worthy discussion topic.
> 
> 
> Tomas Lindquist Olsen:
>> D1/Phobos1 needs to be taken out of Walters hands.
> 
> If you talk like that I think Guido Van Rossum too would not answer much :-)
> I think you have to be much more gentle, etc.
> 
> Bye,
> bearophile

You're probably right. I realise it comes out a bit harsh, it's not really meant as a personal attack, but with the way D is developed it's hard to point anywhere else but Digital Mars, i.e. Walter.

I'm just really disappointed that D1 is neglected. It's something that's on my mind a lot (I've invested quite a bit of my spare time in D), and every now and then when these topics come up the outcome is exactly the same. Nothing happens.

Saaa Wrote:

> Vote++;

There's another thread that has an official poll.  Enter your answer there...