I am less worried about the size than about the quality.
Replacing any part of the standard library is an act similar to changing the language definition, so including new modules into the library should be done with as much care as including new features into the language.
Apart from that, however, I like the "batteries-included" approach of e.g. Python. Crypto, math, web services and many other parts are of sufficient general interest to be part of the standard library. However, if the quality of any module is questionable, it should rather be left out until it is up to shape.
A CPAN-like repository with easy-to-retrieve additional modules is certainly interesting as well, but it does not replace an extensive standard library that you can rely on to be there whenever you write D code.
Greetings, Norbert On 27/04/10 00:30, sybrandy wrote:
I know some people have been talking about adding various classes/libraries that they are working on to Phobos, however there's a good possibility that we make the standard library too large. So, I'd like to propose that instead of one huge standard library, there be several libraries developed for different uses. For example, Phobos could contain everything that one would need to build other libraries easily. E.g. pretty much everything it has now. Another library could be a math library containing everything for large number, matrix arithmetic, statistics, etc. Another could be crypto library. Essentially, what I'm looking at is a standardized set of libraries, but having them broken out so that when someone downloads the D compiler, they get a minimal set vs. everything. Also, by having everything maintained in the same spot, it would hopefully make it easy for people to find and download the libraries they need. Think of something like Perl's CPAN. Anyway, just a thought. Casey
