On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Don <nos...@nospam.com> 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".