Re: std.prelude vs core library

2014-01-17 Thread Sean Kelly
Another small reason is to enforce decoupling between required code and the rest of the library. Back when Phobos was all one library, half the library was compiled into every program. The runtime writes to stderr, the IO package relies on other modules... Kind of like what happens now if you

Re: std.prelude vs core library

2014-01-16 Thread Kagamin
Initially druntime was a part of phobos, and tango was an alternative implementation of standard library, and you couldn't use phobos and tango in one application, that's why druntime was extracted as common base library for tango and phobos.

Re: std.prelude vs core library

2014-01-16 Thread Rikki Cattermole
On Thursday, 16 January 2014 at 19:54:45 UTC, Ross Hays wrote: I was reading about Rust and one thing that caught my attention as interesting was the inclusion of std::prelude in the beginning of every package. I was curious what the advantage of this were versus having things declared in objec

std.prelude vs core library

2014-01-16 Thread Ross Hays
I was reading about Rust and one thing that caught my attention as interesting was the inclusion of std::prelude in the beginning of every package. I was curious what the advantage of this were versus having things declared in object.d for what seems to be the same effect. Also after looking