DMD 1.036 and 2.020 releases

Extrawurst spam at extrawurst.org
Tue Oct 21 12:40:20 PDT 2008


Sean Kelly wrote:
> Sergey Gromov wrote:
>> Tue, 21 Oct 2008 09:40:28 -0700,
>> Sean Kelly wrote:
>>> Don wrote:
>>>> We also now have two modules called 'bitmanip', which is somewhat 
>>>> ironic since we brainstormed for ages trying to come up with a 
>>>> better name for it. Modules with duplicate names have caused linking 
>>>> problems in the past -- not sure if that applies here.
>>> It applies if the modules from both Phobos and druntime end up in the 
>>> same library on *nix.  Windows doesn't appear to have the same issue. 
>>> But I'd love to hear suggestions for alternative names-- I'm not 
>>> terribly good at naming modules :-p.
>>>
>>> Also, any I'd like to see how people feel about having three 
>>> top-level packages in druntime vs. one-- an alternative I'd 
>>> considered was to put everything under core.
>>
>> I actually was expecting all the runtime stuff to be in core.* and was 
>> surprised to find std and sys there.
> 
> I didn't even create core until just recently--before that, the modules 
> in core were global, much like object.  So my thoughts on the druntime 
> package layout are still evolving.  I do now think that having a single 
> top-level package would probably be best, but figured I'd solicit 
> opinions before changing anything.
> 
> 
> Sean

I am all for one toplevel package too.


More information about the Digitalmars-d-announce mailing list