Proposal for a standard for D library naming

[Gregor Richards]

Anders F Björklund wrote:
> Gregor Richards wrote:
>>
>>
>> The entire idea behind my naming proposal is that it makes everything 
>> 100% computer and human generatable while adding very little 
>> confusion.  Having things named lib<name>.<extension> makes 
>> associating packages and libraries difficult.
> 
> 
> Think I missed the "auto-generated" part of the proposal... :-)
> 
> Currently I have the "wx" modules defined in a libwxd.a (or wxd.lib),
> partly since wx is already the C++ library and wxc are the C wrappers.
> 
> Guess I could change that to libD.wx.a, but it looks somewhat strange.
> 

Yes, but if you've ever seen the naming convention, it would be easily 
recognizeable.

Also, I wouldn't be particularly opposed to moving the 'D' to the end, I 
just think that makes the suffixing a but confusing *shrugs*


>> Because C/++ don't have such a nice, structured package style, they 
>> don't have a naming convention for library files (there really 
>> couldn't be one), but I think that's a terrible reason to not use a 
>> naming convention for D.  It would building, even against libraries, 
>> ridiculously easy.
> 
> 
> Actually I don't find it that hard, and e.g. the difference in
> which flags to use between DMD and GDC to be more "trouble"...
> 

Remember, the entire purpose of this is for a build tool (say, build) to 
conform to a standard.  Only the build tool needs to figure out the 
flags for DMD/GDC, the person compiling should get the libraries "for free."


> --anders

  - Gregor Richards