digitalmars.D - Standard library
- freeagle (9/9) Oct 12 2006 Hello everyone.
- =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jari-Matti_M=E4kel=E4?= (5/14) Oct 12 2006 I think we're getting there little by little. It's just that managing
- freeagle (7/22) Oct 12 2006 I agree that core language needs the most attention now, but that is
- BLS (12/23) Oct 12 2006 Agreed!
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
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
freeagle <dalibor.free gmail.com> Jari-Matti Mäkelä wrote:freeagle wrote: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.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
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