Proposal for a standard for D library naming

[Sean Kelly]

Gregor Richards wrote:
> Anders F Björklund wrote:
>> Gregor Richards wrote:
>>
>>> A Modest Proposal for Standardization in Naming of D Libraries
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>> (by Gregor Richards)
>> [...]
>>> If anything is confusing here, please respond, and I will attempt to
>>> clarify. It's all quite clear in my head :)
>>
>> Just to check I understood this, would these be standard names:
>>
>> /usr/include/d/sdl/*
>> /usr/lib/libD.sdl.a
>>
>> /usr/include/d/gl/*
>> /usr/lib/libD.gl.a
>>
>> /usr/include/d/wx/*
>> /usr/lib/libD.wx.a
>>
>> For the modules under "sdl." and "gl." and "wx." , respectively ?
>>
>> --anders
> 
> That would be one means of dividing it.
> 
> Mind you, I'm not inclusive of include files, they are not in the scope 
> of the text.
> 
> Furthermore, you could subdivide, if you wanted.  For example, if you 
> have this:
> 
> /usr/include/d/sdl/amazingsdlplugina/*
> /usr/include/d/sdl/*

For D import files I settled on using /usr/import instead of 
/usr/include.  It seemed to provide a cleaner separation than sticking 
C/C++/D files all in the same tree.


Sean