== Quote from Damian Ziemba ([email protected])'s article > On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 20:27:40 +0300, Denis Shelomovskij wrote: > > +1 to Caligo. I agree that Tango is a good library (and was the best one > > for D1) but, IMHO, porting it to D2 is a bad idea. > > I'm the one who has a big D1+Tango project and I'd better rewrite it > > with D2+Phobos, because: > > > > 0. I don't want to have a "two standard libraries problem" with D2 > > (which one to select?). > > > You don't have to. You can use Tango and Phobos together. > You can also use some selected modules :) For example in one of my > projects I use cipher and digest modules from Tango and rest is Phobos. > > 1. Phobos has a better design (Tango is too complicated in some > > places, has a lot of things I (and a regular programmer IMHO) don't use, > > and has bad design decisions sometimes - both internal and user API) > > > I totally disagree :) Show me example of such bad decision. > > 2. Phobos has less _critical bugs_ because of better code control > > (e.g. Tango has memory corruption bug for a very long time in Vector > > container (#2064)). > > > Tickets and Patches are always welcome :) > > 3. There is no Andrei Alexandrescu clone to generate that perfect > > ideas for Tango. > This one made me rotfl in real :D Haha. Tango had some best developers in > D community including h3r3tic, Kris, Fawzi, Sean and so on, so on :)
I don't like Phobos design, which takes all libs in the same path looking so urgly, but tango seperate libs in different path according to its function using, so I like tango's design.
