www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Standard library

reply freeagle <dalibor.free gmail.com> writes:
Hello everyone.

As I was looking though the www.dsource.org today, an idea occurred to 
me if it would be worth to merge several projects (e.g. Phobos, Mango, 
Ares, Concurrent, ...) into a one standard library. Somewhat in Java's 
fashion. A lot of projects often recreate some parts of code. I think if 
these would be merged together, we could avoid discussions such as 
"Phobos or Ares" and build problems with libraries that uses one std 
library and the user of the lib that use another.

Freeagle
Oct 12 2006
next sibling parent reply =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jari-Matti_M=E4kel=E4?= <jmjmak utu.fi.invalid> writes:
freeagle wrote:
 Hello everyone.
 
 As I was looking though the www.dsource.org today, an idea occurred to
 me if it would be worth to merge several projects (e.g. Phobos, Mango,
 Ares, Concurrent, ...) into a one standard library. Somewhat in Java's
 fashion. A lot of projects often recreate some parts of code. I think if
 these would be merged together, we could avoid discussions such as
 "Phobos or Ares" and build problems with libraries that uses one std
 library and the user of the lib that use another.

I think we're getting there little by little. It's just that managing big libraries slows the development process down. At the moment IMO it seems to be a better idea to have rapid development of libraries and the core language than building a "end user-friendly" framework.
Oct 12 2006
parent freeagle <dalibor.free gmail.com> writes:
Jari-Matti Mäkelä wrote:
 freeagle wrote:
 Hello everyone.

 As I was looking though the www.dsource.org today, an idea occurred to
 me if it would be worth to merge several projects (e.g. Phobos, Mango,
 Ares, Concurrent, ...) into a one standard library. Somewhat in Java's
 fashion. A lot of projects often recreate some parts of code. I think if
 these would be merged together, we could avoid discussions such as
 "Phobos or Ares" and build problems with libraries that uses one std
 library and the user of the lib that use another.

I think we're getting there little by little. It's just that managing big libraries slows the development process down. At the moment IMO it seems to be a better idea to have rapid development of libraries and the core language than building a "end user-friendly" framework.

I agree that core language needs the most attention now, but that is being done by Walter. So the standard library project could be handled by a joined majority of the D community. With a good design and structure of the standard library, we could divide ourselves among several parts and achieve the rapid development you speak about. Without the inconsistencies and unnecessary code recreation.
Oct 12 2006
prev sibling parent BLS <nanali wanadoo.fr> writes:
Agreed!
But there is a need for flat hirachie of *gentle dictators*
TO :
1) describe the future librarie structure (packages)
2) describe features needed and not yet implemented.
3) describe features allready implemented in phobos but need some 
modification.
3) merge existing code into phobos
etc....
Just ask the community about, let's say, *phobos 2* , make a poll.
Björn



freeagle schrieb:
 Hello everyone.
 
 As I was looking though the www.dsource.org today, an idea occurred to 
 me if it would be worth to merge several projects (e.g. Phobos, Mango, 
 Ares, Concurrent, ...) into a one standard library. Somewhat in Java's 
 fashion. A lot of projects often recreate some parts of code. I think if 
 these would be merged together, we could avoid discussions such as 
 "Phobos or Ares" and build problems with libraries that uses one std 
 library and the user of the lib that use another.
 
 Freeagle

Oct 12 2006