Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Don<[email protected]> wrote:
With the druntime project, we now have a run time which is shared between
Tango and Phobos. This is a huge step forward, but it's still not much use
without some common user code.
The highest priorities which I see are, in order:
(1) the C standard library
tango.stdc = std.stdc
(2) low-level compiler-related modules
most of tango.core -- for the most part, this is already part of druntime.
(3) tango.math.Math + tango.math.IEEE = std.math - tgamma().
Can we get agreement on unification of these, at least?
I agree with that. tango.stdc.posix is also far more complete than
what is in Phobos and would be beneficial to everyone.
If we are able to reach agreement on this, I propose the next step would be
to ensure that the contents of these files be made "identical" on Phobos2
and Tango. ("identical" meaning that when the Tango code is ported to D2, it
will be identical to the Phobos2 version, except for module name
differences).
Doing this will not give us very many immediate benefits. It will break a
very small amount of code, but only in fairly trivial ways. In doing so, it
will remove the subtle inconsistencies between the libraries.
From there, the next step (quick to implement, but requiring political
agreement<g>) would be to decide on a common namespace. Since this first
step is much less political, I'd like to get agreement to do it now.
Hmmmmm. Name for a common namespace...... How about.... "common".
I was thinking about keeping it simple.
Either migrate tango to std (and keep module aliases for tango for a
while to help give people some leniency while they update their code) or
perhaps move the whole mess to a new namespace: d (duh!)
Just my $0.02 on that subject...
