On 2012-12-17 02:10, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Given that .di don't work with inlining or CTFE, I'd consider them to be a
very poor solution. You're seriously impairing yourself if you use them. It's
pretty much BS that corporations insist on header files to hide implementation,
since it really doesn't work, but if we're going to be forced to a have a
solution which tries to hide implementation to make folks like that happy, we
could at least have one that doesn't cripple the language like .di files do. It
may not truly hide the implementation any better than .di files do, but at
least it would allow us to still use the language properly.
I'm not expecting this problem to be fixed any time soon (we have far higher
priorites), but I really do think that in the long run .di files should be
deprecated in favor of a binary solution which doesn't stop things like
inlining or CTFE from working.
If a function needs to be template, inline or CTFE it can be manually
put in the .di file. I assume that will work.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
