shebang launcher for D programs

[Andrei Alexandrescu (See Website For Email)]

Anders F Björklund wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu (See Website For Email) skrev:
> 
>>> I'm not sure what you mean. If I import foo and bar, then rebuild
>>> will include foo.o and bar.o when compiling the main D program...
>>>
>>> Had I used gdmd, then I *would* have needed to include foo.o/bar.o
>>> (or a library containing those), but rebuild picks dependencies up:
>>>
>>> run.d:
>>> ======
>>> #!/usr/bin/env rdmd -v --verbose --compiler=rebuild
>>
>> Great. For some reason, it didn't work in my initial tests; I guess I've
>> been sloppy somewhere.
>>
>> Any chance you make the --compiler=rebuild a default? Or is rebuild a
>> separate product? (If so, that's not an attractive option.)
> 
> Let's see now...
> 
> rdmd as it stands at the moment is intended for dmd/gdmd, which means
> that it won't work with multi-module programs (implicitly, that is...)
> And Build/Bud or alternatively Rebuild are separate products as you say,
> so it probably shouldn't be made the default option (even if it works)
> 
> Bud: http://dsource.org/projects/build/
> Rebuild: http://dsource.org/projects/dsss/
> 
> But this is the same for all D programs, not just the "script" variant,
> with the regular D compilers you need to give it all the object files
> like you do with C/C++ compilers but with these alternative "build"
> compilers you only give it the first program like you do with javac.
> 
> i.e. even if you do use your own modules, you *could* compile those into
> a library and then link that with all your scripts using a -l option...
> It's just that the "build" tools do this for you, and can also be taught
> to pick up external libraries using: "version(build) pragma(link, baz);"
> 
> So I think it's fair to have the rdmd program default to using dmd/gdmd,
> even if bud/rebuild do exist as an optional (and recommended) D add-on ?

Well fair of course it is, it's IMHO just not enough. I strongly believe 
that an rdmd that automatically figures out dependencies must be part of 
the standard D distribution.

>> Essentially what you want is to make rdmd do the deed flag-free:
>>
>> $ rdmd prog args
>>
>> does whatever it takes to build prog.d (if necessary) and then runs it
>> passing args. Each extra needed flag cuts your cult following in half. 
>> :o)
> 
> Currently this can be done by recompiling rdmd... (assuming here that
> the rdmd source code eventually gets included in the DMD distribution)
> 
> This is the section to modify:
>     char[] exepath, dfilepath, compiler = "dmd", tmpdir = "/tmp";
>     version (GNU)
>     {
>         compiler = "gdmd";
>     }
>     version (Windows)
>     {
>         tmpdir = toString(getenv("TEMP"));
>     }
> 
> Maybe it could even use a configuration file for those two options.
> (i.e. a simple INI file for overriding --compiler and --tmpdir ?)

If you make the code open source, I'd be glad to hack into it to make it 
do the deed without relying on any other tool.


Andrei