On 11/15/2013 05:52 AM, Patrick Walton wrote:
* One of the BIG problems with D uptake is the split library problem
referred to before. They could not get a comfortable standard library
for a long time, despite some extremely bright and decently famous
engineers working on D. My understanding is that it's mostly been solved
now (after what, 10 years?). That'd be a disaster for Rust if things
split badly at the interface level.
I agree, and I would like to prevent divergence. Divergence of *implementation*
is OK and probably inevitable if Rust succeeds; divergence of API for no reason
can harm the ecosystem.
If I may say a word on this (I have also been a D user), all this may well also
be a human problem. People feel badly whenever decisions on points important for
them are taken in opaque, rush, or uncooperative manners. D's first "official"
stdlib was somewhat like that, and felt more or less undesigned (or
unsufficiently); while the core language was already quite good, pleasant,
strongly usable.
I'd rather wait one or even two or three years more than expected for Rust 1.0
and get a design that most joyfully support or at least agree with... After all,
we are waiting for a good static, systems programming language for, what, 40
years? (Please, don't rush for 1.0, take the time needed.)
Denis
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
Rust-dev@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
