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