On 6/15/11 8:33 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
I can't really think of any other issues.
Allow me to repeat: the scheme as you mention it is unable to figure and load dependent remote libraries for remote libraries. It's essentially a flat scheme in which you know only the top remote library but nothing about the rest.
The dip takes care of that by using transitivity and by relying on the presence of dependency information exactly where it belongs - in the dependent source files. Separating that information from source files has two liabilities. First, it breaks the whole transitivity thing. Second, it adds yet another itsy-bitsy pellet of metadata/config/whatevs files that need to be minded. I just don't see the advantage of imposing that.
Andrei
