Modules/packages correspondence to file system

[kris]

Hasan Aljudy wrote:
> 
> 
> jcc7 wrote:
> 
>> In article <e9jaad$1mlg$1 at digitaldaemon.com>, Lars E. says...
>>
>>> Why are tools like build (http://dsource.org/projects/build) even 
>>> neccessary?
>>
>>
>>
>> I disagree that they are "neccessary", but they are useful.
>>
>> These tools are useful because they provide functionality that isn't 
>> currently
>> available in dmd/gdc. Maybe someday the compilers include more 
>> features that
>> Build has, and Build would become less useful. (But I suspect that 
>> won't happen
>> any time soon and Build will continue to be quite useful for a long 
>> time.) ;)
>>
>> jcc7
> 
> 
> I think his point was, build shouldn't have been needed in the first 
> place, because the functionality should've been a part of dmd.


Yes. I'm also of the opinion the "recursive import" aspect of Build 
should be part of the compiler front-end ... for dmd, the necessary 
changes are quite simple; with gdc the changes are apparently a little 
more involved.

On the other hand, I wouldn't want to take anything away from Build ... 
Derek has given us a extremely useful tool, and deserves all the credit 
for making D "usable on a daily basis" (yes, it makes that much of a 
difference) for anything other than demo programs.

Still, if Derek would be comfortable 'gifting' that aspect of Build with 
the compiler front-end, I think it really should be in there.

What do others think? And Derek?