No header files?

BCS none at anon.com
Tue Oct 27 13:50:31 PDT 2009


Hello Yigal,

> On 22/10/2009 18:52, BCS wrote:
> 
>> So, if your library has LLVM code representation, then it's easier to
>> get to but just as bad as reading a ASM dump from the compiler.
>> I'm being more than a bit sarcastic there, but keep in mind that 99%
>> of
>> the info I'm interested in isn't in the assembly code (function
>> names,
>> argument names, types, comments) and/or would be better viewed as the
>> original source.
> even though it looks like ASM it is not the same. the llvm will
> contain the info (function names, argument names, types, comments) as
> metadata. visual studio has a view to see all metadata in an assembly,
> and D IDEs will implement a similar properties view to show the same
> info.

And as soon as you *require* an IDE to view the stuff, working without one 
goes from 'less than ideal' to functionally impossible. I think we have been 
over this ground before; I have major issues with tool chains that are more 
or less impossible to use without a language aware IDE. I know there are 
productivity gains to be had from IDEs and I know that even in the best of 
cases working without one will cost something. What I'm saying is that I 
want it to be *possible* to work without one.

> comparing to original source is useless - commercial companies may
> want to protect their commercial secrets and provide you with only a
> binary file and the bare minimum to use that file in your projects. D
> needs to support that option.

I agree. What I want is that your "binary file and the bare minimum to use 
that file" includes something with the public API that can be handedly read 
with a text editor. (Really I'd like DMD to force people it to include a 
proper well written documentation file with good code examples and a nice 
tutorial but we all know that's not going to happen).

>> I'm cynical enough that I'd bet if D switches to a "smarter lib
>> format"
>> a lot of people would manage to forget the documentation.
>> With the current system, the library must be shipped with, at a
>> minimum,
>> a human readable list of prototypes.
> without proper documentation people will have no way to know how to
> use such libraries.

If the lib is worth useing, the function names will tell you something.





More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list