On 21/07/2015 8:07 p.m., extrawurst wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 07:00:57 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
On Monday, 20 July 2015 at 23:18:34 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 7/20/15 5:30 PM, Martin Nowak wrote:
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 08:28:08 UTC, Suliman wrote:
[...]
It doesn't make sense to include vibe.d.
I think it does - this has been discussed before. -- Andrei
It has, in length
http://forum.dlang.org/post/mdnrus$188e$1...@digitalmars.com, but you
remain one of the very few to think it is a good idea to distribute
vibe.d with dmd.
It doesn't make sense because dub is the enabling tool for the whole
package ecosystem, with which vibe.d is fully integrated (dub was
formerly called vpm - vibe package manager).
Copying a vibe.d version into the distribution creates a lot of
problems without solving anything.
- what about vibe.d's dependencies
- how would dub know about the distributed vibe.d package
- how to use multiple vibe.d versions in parallel
If your long-term goal is to integrate vibe into phobos, fine,
though I'm not a fan of this strategy b/c an independent package
ecosystem can grow faster.
Simply copying a dub package into the distribution doesn't help anyone.
I agree, i am a fan of vibe.d too but including it in phobos just tastes
wrong. if you absolutely want to distribute such a lib then consider
libasync (https://github.com/etcimon/libasync) which is at least
completely written in D.
+1
