On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 01:31:29 -0500
"Nick Sabalausky" <a...@a.a> wrote:
> > Looks like a good enhancement for rdmd. That it doesn't "fail
> > successfully" is a bug.
May I suggest that rmdm prints out the command it sends to dmd (even when
successful)? Not only it's "educative" but it should provide the correct list
of modules ;-) (so that solving the issue about C files is then 3s work).
> @spir: rdmd's command-line syntax is like this:
>
> rdmd {args to dmd and rdmd} app.d {args sent to app.exe}
>
> So anything after the first *.d param is automatically considered a param
> for when rdmd runs the app your building, not for rdmd/dmd. Of course, if
> you're using --build-only, then such params just simply get ignored. In
> short, you have to do it like this:
>
> rdmd --build-only -ofmyProg myCFuncs.o myProg.d
Right, than you. Anyway finishing with the "program" module (the only only one
that should have a main()) makes sense. And if it's for running its args come
next.
But the: how would rdmd makes the distinction when a prog happens to apply on
modules? (You know, refactoring tools or such). My choice would be that they
must first be 'built-only'.
> Unfortunately, that still doesn't work with the official version of rdmd.
> However...
>
> @Andrei: I submitted an rdmd patch for this not too long ago:
>
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4928
>
> It fixes this problem for object files, static library files, ".def" files
> and response files.
Great!
Denis
-- -- -- -- -- -- --
vit esse estrany ☣
spir.wikidot.com
