Facebook open sources flint, a C++ linter written in D

[Nick Sabalausky]

On 3/2/2014 7:35 AM, Dicebot wrote:
> On Sunday, 2 March 2014 at 12:29:15 UTC, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
>> I'd say a good static code analysis require a full compiler frontend
>> and I see no reasons why there can't be such thing in dmd as it is
>> just as required as profiler, unittesting or documentation generation
>> which are already in. Of course it has nothing to do with compiler
>> warnings and is a separate thing. But looks like people aren't
>> interested in it as enhancement request 9811 [1] still has no votes or
>> discussion.
>
> I think built-in profile and documentation is also inferior to having
> those as separate binaries but distributing together with compiler and
> being callable from it. Unit test are different because those are much
> more integrated with language itself.
>

Personally, I've never really understood the benefit one way or another 
of related tools being in one binary vs multiple binaries. As I see it, 
the important thing is that all relevant *source* is well-encapsulated. 
Unless you're on a system where kilobytes matter (ie, if you're in a 
time warp), anything else just comes down to a matter of:

git clone url
dmd -profile src.d

vs

git-clone url
dmd-profile src.d

>
> Compiler as a (dynamic) library is the way to go.

Definitely!