boost crowd.

[Hans Uhlig]

On 11/28/2011 9:40 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 11/28/2011 05:41 PM, Alexey Veselovsky wrote:
>> Separate hand written specification is rulez for human. It is best
>> short module description (with some useful manually written comments).
>> I like it more then autogenerated docs (by doxygen and so on).
>>
>> Autogenerated specifications (headers and so on) are worst and ugly.
>> But in language like java and C# it is last chance if there is no
>> autogenerated docs and sources.
>
> The compiler _should_ enforce consistence between *.d and *.di files
> when compiling the *.d file. It just does not because nobody has
> implemented it. That is possibly because separate hand written
> specification is rarely used in D development. (alternatively, it could
> be the case that hand written specification is used rarely because DMD
> does not check .d and .di for consistence.)
>
> Autogeneration of *.di files does not have to be the normal case (and
> currently it is so buggy that I managed to find a segfault bug in the
> compiler while compiling a mis-generated *.di file!)
>
> Also, auto generation can hardly even work satisfactory in the general
> case, when there are many static if's/version statements or string mixin
> declarations on module scope.

Can we put this on the priority list. It would be nice to be able to 
define a specification and then be able to verify against it during unit 
tests, compilation etc.