It's seems that most hard things to geting Phobos and Tango working together is that the "object.d" is different. Because everything is derived from "object.d", so if we want to geting Phobos and Tango working together, we must do a hudge refactoring. But we have to do, because of Phobos and Tango will be larger and larger. And there is such a day, we must geting Phobos and Tango working together, it's be a very hard thing to do.

And we have another choice, that give up Phobos or Tango, leave one library as the stardard! But i think this would be harder.

A SUGGESTION FOR THE D COMMULITY 2: THE RECKONING

In theaters on Halloween

 - Gregor Richards

I'd just like to mention I also love D to have just a single stdlib. Mostly because the forking is such a waste.

Gregor Richards a écrit :
> A SUGGESTION FOR THE D COMMULITY 2: THE RECKONING
> 
> In theaters on Halloween
> 
>  - Gregor Richards

That made me laugh a lot. :-D

Yonggang Luo Wrote:

> It's seems that most hard things to geting Phobos and Tango working together is that the "object.d" is different. Because everything is derived from "object.d", so if we want to geting Phobos and Tango working together, we must do a hudge refactoring. But we have to do, because of Phobos and Tango will be larger and larger. And there is such a day, we must geting Phobos and Tango working together, it's be a very hard thing to do.
> 
> And we have another choice, that give up Phobos or Tango, leave one library as the stardard! But i think this would be harder.

Your starting to get annoying with this "have to do" this "have to do" that bullshit, no one has to do anything there is no real big reason to make them compatible with each other, if it's not important and it's not no one is going to care.

And there is a standard libary already, phobos, why discontinue tangos because it's the standard? Simply because you don't want to be tempted into using tango? Your really not making any sense.

"Rayne" <DiscipleRayne@gmail.com> wrote in message news:gaqtb1$855$1@digitalmars.com...
> Yonggang Luo Wrote:
>
>> It's seems that most hard things to geting Phobos and Tango working together is that the "object.d" is different. Because everything is derived from "object.d", so if we want to geting Phobos and Tango working together, we must do a hudge refactoring. But we have to do, because of Phobos and Tango will be larger and larger. And there is such a day, we must geting Phobos and Tango working together, it's be a very hard thing to do.
>>
>> And we have another choice, that give up Phobos or Tango, leave one library as the stardard! But i think this would be harder.
>
> Your starting to get annoying with this "have to do" this "have to do" that bullshit, no one has to do anything there is no real big reason to make them compatible with each other, if it's not important and it's not no one is going to care.

Having one library would be easier.

>
> And there is a standard libary already, phobos,
I agree.

>why discontinue tangos because it's the standard?
As I read it he is stating that it is a possibility to drop one of the two libraries.

>Simply because you don't want to be tempted into using tango?
I read no preference for phobos in the post.

>Your really not making any sense.
He thinks that merging two libraries together will become harder the larger they become.

Saaa Wrote:

> 
> "Rayne" <DiscipleRayne@gmail.com> wrote in message news:gaqtb1$855$1@digitalmars.com...
> > Yonggang Luo Wrote:
> >
> >> It's seems that most hard things to geting Phobos and Tango working together is that the "object.d" is different. Because everything is derived from "object.d", so if we want to geting Phobos and Tango working together, we must do a hudge refactoring. But we have to do, because of Phobos and Tango will be larger and larger. And there is such a day, we must geting Phobos and Tango working together, it's be a very hard thing to do.
> >>
> >> And we have another choice, that give up Phobos or Tango, leave one library as the stardard! But i think this would be harder.
> >
> > Your starting to get annoying with this "have to do" this "have to do" that bullshit, no one has to do anything there is no real big reason to make them compatible with each other, if it's not important and it's not no one is going to care.
> 
> Having one library would be easier.
> 
> >
> > And there is a standard libary already, phobos,
> I agree.
> 
> >why discontinue tangos because it's the standard?
> As I read it he is stating that it is a possibility to drop one of the two libraries.
> 
> >Simply because you don't want to be tempted into using tango?
> I read no preference for phobos in the post.
> 
> >Your really not making any sense.
> He thinks that merging two libraries together will become harder the larger they become.
> 
> 
> 

Both libarys are useful, and they both offer different features that could be locked into either libary with a little work. I never said he prefered phobos, but I was making a point, hes stating there should only be one libary for D, as in (drop tango/phobos and go with <insert libary here>.

I don't see why having one libary would be easier, you already have one libary you just get to choose between them, I think it's nice to have an alternate choice of libary.

>> > Yonggang Luo Wrote:
>> >
>> >> It's seems that most hard things to geting Phobos and Tango working
>> >> together is that the "object.d" is different. Because everything is
>> >> derived from "object.d", so if we want to geting Phobos and Tango
>> >> working
>> >> together, we must do a hudge refactoring. But we have to do, because
>> >> of
>> >> Phobos and Tango will be larger and larger. And there is such a day,
>> >> we
>> >> must geting Phobos and Tango working together, it's be a very hard
>> >> thing
>> >> to do.
>> >>
>> >> And we have another choice, that give up Phobos or Tango, leave one library as the stardard! But i think this would be harder.
>> >
>> > Your starting to get annoying with this "have to do" this "have to do"
>> > that bullshit, no one has to do anything there is no real big reason to
>> > make them compatible with each other, if it's not important and it's
>> > not
>> > no one is going to care.
>>
>> Having one library would be easier.
>>
>> >
>> > And there is a standard libary already, phobos,
>> I agree.
>>
>> >why discontinue tangos because it's the standard?
>> As I read it he is stating that it is a possibility to drop one of the
>> two
>> libraries.
>>
>> >Simply because you don't want to be tempted into using tango?
>> I read no preference for phobos in the post.
>>
>> >Your really not making any sense.
>> He thinks that merging two libraries together will become harder the
>> larger
>> they become.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Both libarys are useful, and they both offer different features that could be locked into either libary with a little work. I never said he prefered phobos, but I was making a point, hes stating there should only be one libary for D, as in (drop tango/phobos and go with <insert libary here>. I don't see why having one libary would be easier, you already have one libary you just get to choose between them, I think it's nice to have an alternate choice of libary.

I thought you agreed :)

Easier in that I don't have to make code from others compatible with my
stdlib.
Yeah its nice to have an alternative, but I'd also want all available code
to be compatible with it.
If I can choose the stdlib (leaving me the alternative) and everybody else
would use the stdlib I'd chosen that would fix it as well :D

Rayne wrote:
> Yonggang Luo Wrote:
> 
>> It's seems that most hard things to geting Phobos and Tango working together is that the "object.d" is different. Because everything is derived from "object.d", so if we want to geting Phobos and Tango working together, we must do a hudge refactoring. But we have to do, because of Phobos and Tango will be larger and larger. And there is such a day, we must geting Phobos and Tango working together, it's be a very hard thing to do. 
>>
>> And we have another choice, that give up Phobos or Tango, leave one library as the stardard! But i think this would be harder.
> 
> Your starting to get annoying with this "have to do" this "have to do" that bullshit, no one has to do anything there is no real big reason to make them compatible with each other, if it's not important and it's not no one is going to care.
> 
> And there is a standard libary already, phobos, why discontinue tangos because it's the standard? Simply because you don't want to be tempted into using tango? Your really not making any sense.

True, but a fundamental issue we are dealing with now is code written for one library cannot be used in an application with uses the other library. This is getting better as people are making their code work in both libraries. Personally, I dont care, but it can be a real pain in the ass, especially to people who are new to D.

On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 1:45 AM, Rayne <DiscipleRayne@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Both libarys are useful, and they both offer different features that could be locked into either libary with a little work. I never said he prefered phobos, but I was making a point, hes stating there should only be one libary for D, as in (drop tango/phobos and go with <insert libary here>.
>
> I don't see why having one libary would be easier, you already have one libary you just get to choose between them, I think it's nice to have an alternate choice of libary.

Rayne, there's a difference between being just another library, and another D runtime library.  This is not like using STL vs ATL.  You can mix and match code using those two libraries no problem.  The issue is that installing Tango requires messing with your _compiler_ configuration.  If you set up your compiler for one runtime library, currently you cannot link at all with code using  the other runtime library.

Someone will of course mention that you can using Tangobos.  It's the best workaround right now, but it's still just yet another layer of complication.  Also the copy of Phobos inside Tangobos tends to lag pretty far behind DMD's.  So even that's not perfect.  And I think Tangobos doesn't work for programs that do a lot of thread wizardry.

--bb