No header files?

[Jason House]

AJ Wrote:

> 
> "Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy at yahoo.com> wrote in message 
> news:op.u157hfkveav7ka at localhost.localdomain...
> > On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 17:59:52 -0400, AJ <aj at nospam.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Since D has no header files, how does one create "a library" that another
> >> developer can use without exposing the implementation?
> >
> > try dmd -H.
> >
> > .di files are D header files, basically used for the reason you specify.
> 
> OK, so header files can be generated. The thing is though, when I am 
> designing at the code level, I start with the declarations (such as class 
> data members and methods) and do the implementation (or one can hand it off 
> to someone else) afterwards. That serves as the "blue print" for further 
> development and remains as first level of documentation as well. Working 
> with just "implementation files" seems to be putting the cart before the 
> horse. While eliminating something unnecessary is something to strive for, I 
> don't think header files are unnecessary in the development process (i.e., I 
> don't think that relegating them to just the situation given with my OP is 
> good, exactly for the reasons of usefullness I gave). 
> 
> 

I think you keep a very structured development style that few share. Nothing stops you from writing a header-file-like .d file and then hand it off for someone to fill in the methods, etc... A good IDE can also make a .d file look like a header file. Personally, I like colocating documentation with implementation and using tools (such as dmd) to extract higher level documentation.