dmd -c behaviour doesn't take account of packages.

[Bernard Helyer]

On Wednesday, 22 February 2012 at 22:05:51 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
> Then what happens when you have
>
> dmc -c foo/a.d foo_a.d
>

Good point.

>
> Regardless, I really wouldn't like the idea of screwing with 
> the object file
> names to try and avoid collisions.

Well, the thing is in this case everything is being passed to the 
compiler. It knows the names of everything. But yeah, I think 
complaining is fine _if_ dmd allows individual modules to be 
named explicitly. Otherwise, all in one is good. But really, even 
prefixing it would be better than what we have now. What about 
'module.foo_a.o' if foo_a isn't in a package?