On 1/18/11 11:37 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 22:17:08 +0200, Walter Bright
<newshou...@digitalmars.com> wrote:
Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
IMO, sticking to the C-ism of "one object file at a time" and
dependency on external build tools / makefiles is the biggest mistake
DMD did in this regard.
You don't need such a tool with dmd until your project exceeds a
certain size. Most of my little D projects' "build tool" is a one line
script that looks like:
dmd foo.d bar.d
There's just no need to go farther than that.
Let's review the two problems discussed in this thread:
1) Not passing all modules to the compiler results in a
nearly-incomprehensible (for some) linker error.
2) DMD's inability (or rather, unwillingness) to build the whole program
when it's in the position to, which creates the dependency on external
build tools (or solutions that require unnecessary human effort).
Are you saying that there's no need to fix neither of these because they
don't bother you personally?
I think the larger picture is even more important. We need a package
system that takes Internet distribution into account. I got word on the
IRC that dsss was that. It would be great to resurrect that, or start a
new project with such goals.
Andrei
