On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 04:55:28 -0400, SHOO <[email protected]> wrote:
Tango is great library for D1. I am Tango user and I am indebted to
Tango well. But Tango has some probrems.
- Tango's license is BSD lisence or AFL. This license is incompatible to
Phobos's Boost license.
- The specification is disregarded, for example Object.dispose and
string.
- Tango supports only D1
- In particular, deep regret is to have split resources of D into two
halves.
If possible, I want to migrate to D2. And I want to be separated from
Tango. However, some functions are insufficient for Phobos compared with
Tango.
The std.date module is one of the list of dissatisfaction to Phobos.
I summarize my (and some of Japanese users's) opinion following:
- I want to handle it as another thing for the time and the time span.
- I want a more structural class for time operating.
- std.date is a bit buggy...
By these reasons, I made std.time module as the first step of the
contribution for Phobos.
I like what you've done. It's very similar to what was done in Tango. I
hate to ask this, but I just want to verify that you did not base your
code on Tango, especially since you have used Tango. I was planning to
implement a Time system for Tango that mimics Tango's design, if that is
what you have done, I think that's perfectly legit. Basically, I want to
verify that you rewrote all your implementation from scratch.
More comments:
I'd like accessors for seconds/milliseconds/etc from Span.
I'm not sure I like the Clocks structure. Why have a separate Span that
is in terms of some arbitrary OS resolution? Can you give an example of
why I'd want to use Clocks instead of Span?
-Steve
