Instructions for compilation from multiple source files

[Solomon E via Digitalmars-d-learn]

On Monday, 10 November 2014 at 15:35:54 UTC, ketmar via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 14:12:12 +0000
> Solomon E via Digitalmars-d-learn 
> <digitalmars-d-learn at puremagic.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I keep saying I want documentation or specifications.
> and i keep saying that if you can't find those for you case, 
> you'd
> better stick with IDE. you keep ignoring the fact that gdc is a 
> part of
> GCC and you have to read GCC documentation to understand the 
> process.
>
> ok, it's your right to insist that gdc must include GCC 
> documentation,
> but don't expect it to happen, as this will be a useless 
> duplication.
>
> any person that is familiar with GCC suite immediately groks 
> how to use
> gdc, 'cause it's not different from other GCC frontends. sure, 
> it has
> some specific options, and those options are documented in 
> manpage.
>
> if you don't want to see gdc as a part of GCC suite... oh, 
> well, it's
> your choice. other gdc users has no problems with that and they 
> aren't
> refusing to understand how GCC should be used, what files it 
> produces
> and how.
>
> as you obviously don't want to learn that, i keep recommending 
> you to
> use IDE for working with your code, 'cause IDE knows how to call
> requred tools from the toolchain.

I do know about how to use GCC and where the documentation for
that is. I know what .o files and .a files are in terms of GCC
for C, because there's tons of documentation about that. I
thought that there might be a little bit of documentation about
what they are for D, or a specification. A language that's about
"grokking" things (I've read Stranger in a Strange Land, so I
"grok" what it means) is not the sort of language that I want to
use. I prefer that a language that specifies what a computer is
to do be specified itself. That is all.

I don't want to use an IDE that pretends to have AI about what to
do for me, just because a language doesn't have enough
documentation to let me know what to do for myself. That's like
the opposite of learning to program. In this case it's about the
tiny amount of documentation for GDC, which assumes that users
will know about using GCC for C or C++ and will apply a diff of
how D differs from those to use it for D. In other cases I've
seen all over the "Language Reference" it's the same thing: D is
described roughly as a diff of C and C++ and not as a language in
its own right, with examples that may or may not be complete and
who can tell where they are complete enough and where they aren't?