DIP11: Automatic downloading of libraries

Nick Sabalausky a at a.a
Wed Jun 15 21:44:40 PDT 2011


"Andrei Alexandrescu" <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote in message 
news:itb6os$161f$1 at digitalmars.com...
> On 6/15/11 3:47 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> "Andrei Alexandrescu"<SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org>  wrote in message
>> news:itagdr$29mt$1 at digitalmars.com...
>>> On 6/15/11 8:33 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>>>> I can't really think of any other issues.
>>>
>>> Allow me to repeat: the scheme as you mention it is unable to figure and
>>> load dependent remote libraries for remote libraries. It's essentially a
>>> flat scheme in which you know only the top remote library but nothing
>>> about the rest.
>>>
>>> The dip takes care of that by using transitivity and by relying on the
>>> presence of dependency information exactly where it belongs - in the
>>> dependent source files.
>>
>> Dependency information is already in the source: The "import" statement.
>>
>> The actual path to the depndencies does not belong in the source file - 
>> that
>> *is* a configuration matter, and cramming it into the source only makes
>> configuring harder.
>
> Why? I mean I can't believe it just because you are saying it. On the face 
> of it, it seems that on the contrary, there's no more need for crummy 
> little configuration files definition, discovery, adjustment, parsing, 
> etc. Clearly such are needed in certain situations but I see no reason on 
> why they must be the only way to go.
>

I do have reasons, but TBH I really don't have any more time or energy for 
these uphill debates right now.





More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list