www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - A suggestion to D commulity 2

reply Yonggang Luo <luoyonggang gmail.com> writes:
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.
Sep 16 2008
next sibling parent reply Gregor Richards <Richards codu.org> writes:
A SUGGESTION FOR THE D COMMULITY 2: THE RECKONING

In theaters on Halloween

  - Gregor Richards
Sep 16 2008
parent Ary Borenszweig <ary esperanto.org.ar> writes:
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
Sep 17 2008
prev sibling next sibling parent "Saaa" <empty needmail.com> writes:
I'd just like to mention I also love D to have just a single stdlib. Mostly 
because the forking is such a waste. 
Sep 17 2008
prev sibling parent reply Rayne <DiscipleRayne gmail.com> writes:
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.
Sep 17 2008
next sibling parent reply "Saaa" <empty needmail.com> writes:
"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,

why discontinue tangos because it's the standard?

libraries.
Simply because you don't want to be tempted into using tango?

Your really not making any sense.

they become.
Sep 17 2008
parent reply Rayne <DiscipleRayne gmail.com> writes:
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,

why discontinue tangos because it's the standard?

libraries.
Simply because you don't want to be tempted into using tango?

Your really not making any sense.

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.
Sep 17 2008
parent "Saaa" <empty needmail.com> writes:
 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,

why discontinue tangos because it's the standard?

two libraries.
Simply because you don't want to be tempted into using tango?

Your really not making any sense.

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
Sep 17 2008
prev sibling next sibling parent reply J Duncan <jtd514_ ameritech.net> writes:
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.
Sep 17 2008
parent Tom S <h3r3tic remove.mat.uni.torun.pl> writes:
J Duncan wrote:
 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.

*gasps* ... you're alive!! :O Now, give me all your metaobject protocols :P -- Tomasz Stachowiak http://h3.team0xf.com/ h3/h3r3tic on #D freenode
Sep 18 2008
prev sibling parent "Bill Baxter" <wbaxter gmail.com> writes:
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
Sep 17 2008