QtD 0.1 is out!

Yigal Chripun yigal100 at gmail.com
Sat Feb 28 08:42:18 PST 2009


Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Yigal Chripun<yigal100 at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> I agree with the above but there is still a small issue here:
>> A module is a single file and when you have several large classes that are
>> tightly coupled you can get a very big file with thousands of lines. what if
>> i want to put each class in its own file?
>> besides, the notion of a module is somewhat redundant - it's functionally a
>> static struct.
>>
>> this is related to D's compilation model which is copied from C/C++ and it
>> seems to me that this model is outdated. C#'s model of assemblies and
>> metadata seems more capable. for instance there's no need for header files,
>> that info is stored in the metadata of the assembly.
>>
>
> Preciiiisely.  I've been toying with the concept of a compiler which
> doesn't actually emit object files until it has to link its code into
> some form of executable.  Instead it produces these sort of
> platform-independent internal representation files, which can contain
> all the metadata and symbol information needed.  They can be as small
> as a single module or as large as an entire multi-level package.  It
> sounds a lot like the model C# has adopted.

I also think that source code organization should be orthogonal to the 
organization of the deployment executables (assemblies in .net)
something simillar to namespaces in C#.

other useful metadata to include in those files is the documantation and 
versioning info.


More information about the Digitalmars-d-announce mailing list