DI Generation Needs your Help!

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 12/19/11 2:11 AM, Adam Wilson wrote:
> As you may all be aware, I've been trying to improve the automated
> generation of .di files and I now have something that I feel is
> testable. Currently the new code only makes the following changes.
>
> 1. Function Implementations are removed
> 2. Private Function Declarations are removed.
> 3. Variable Initializers, except for const, are removed.

Don't forget immutable.

> Everything else is left alone. Templates and mixins are not addressed
> with this code and *should* not be modified. That's where I need your
> help, the test cases I have written cover some basic scenarios but I
> don't have the capability to test these changes with the diverse code
> base that the community has created.
>
> drey_ from IRC was kind enough to test build Derelict with the changes
> and has discovered a potential issue around private imports. Derelict
> uses private imports that contain types which are used in function alias
> declarations. As one would expect, this caused many compiler errors.
> Currently, I feel that private imports should be stripped from the DI
> file as they are intended to be internal to the module. However, I want
> to put it to the community to decide, and I would especially appreciate
> Mr. Bright's opinion on private imports in DI files.

I suspect you'd still need the private imports because template code may 
use them.

This is great work. It's almost a textbook example of how one can make a 
great positive impact on D's development by finding an area of 
improvement and working on it. Congratulations!

You may want to generate DIs for Phobos and take a look at them. Phobos 
uses a vast array of D's capabilities so it's an effective unittest for 
DI generation.


Thanks,

Andrei