On 29/10/2012 18:38, Walter Bright wrote:
On 10/29/2012 2:49 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>> You'll see the same complaints from the same people appearing for C
code
>> being linked, which does not have mangled names.
>
> You still don't get any source location.
It's usually pretty obvious, but when it isn't, I use:
grep -r symbol_name *.d
or whatever search function your IDE has.
>>
http://www.digitalmars.com/ctg/OptlinkErrorMessages.html#symbol_undefined
>
> That's only for optlink.
True, but the suggestions for what to do next apply to any linker.
>> *Every* programmer should know what a linker does.
>
> I agree with you, but again, that's not the world we live in. On the
other hand,
> why does, say, an PHP (insert your favorite dynamic programming
language that
> doesn't use a linker) programmer need to know what a linker is?
Because it's a fundamental tool for programmers, despite PHP not using
it. It's like knowing what a CPU register is.
Haha, I know a lot of professional programmers who do not know the
difference between the stack and the heap but still are able to write
useful code.
You really seem to be lurking way too much on newsgroups with
knowledgeable people ;)
