Request for Review: DI Generation Improvements

[Alex Rønne Petersen]

On 16-05-2012 19:00, Adam Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, 16 May 2012 05:46:44 -0700, Steven Schveighoffer
> <schveiguy at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 15 May 2012 05:51:44 -0400, kenji hara <k.hara.pg at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Old days import/core/thread.di was generated from src/core/thread.d .
>>> Current import/core/thread.di is generated from src/core/thread.*di* .
>>
>> Huh? Why the copy? Just move src/core/thread.di to import/core/thread.di
>>
>> object.di lives in import/core, I think it should be the same for all
>> the hand-maintained .di files.
>
> Actually, object.di lives /import. Moving thread.di to /import/core
> would require a significant change to the clean targets of both
> makefiles since they just rm the whole /import/core directory at the
> moment. It's not impossible and if you guys agree that the change should
> be made I'd be happy to make it happen.

I think it's a good idea.

>
>> FWIW, I thought thread.di was being generated because of this.
>>
>> Also, I agree that thread and object are the only modules that need to
>> be .di files. Everything else is already opaque for the most part, and
>> the pieces that aren't are just supporting code that can be visible.
>>
>> What we need to protect is the runtime implementation, so projects
>> cannot depend on private APIs that may change.
>>
>> -Steve
>
> The biggest problem right now is that, while we all agree that these
> changes need to happen, getting them merged appears to be nigh
> impossible. There appears to be a bottleneck in the process caused by
> the lack of capable persons to verify and execute the merges,
> particularly for druntime. There are 11 passing merges for the druntime
> at last count, out of 28 total. Alexrp and dawgfoto particularly seem to
> have a lot of pulls that are just languishing.
>

-- 
Alex Rønne Petersen
alex at lycus.org
http://lycus.org