Proposed improvements to the separate compilation model

[Dmitry Olshansky]

05-Mar-2013 21:39, Rob T пишет:
> On Tuesday, 5 March 2013 at 12:01:54 UTC, eles wrote:
>> On Monday, 4 March 2013 at 06:18:35 UTC, Manu wrote:
>>> +1_000_000_000
>>>
>>> Yes please!
>>> It's near impossible to get a brief overview of a class at a glance
>>> in D!
>>
>> Exactly for this reason, what about make this way at least the
>> recommended way, if not the single one?
>>
>> What is to lose? As about what to win, basically each .d file will
>> carry its .di file (class definition) inside it, and the latter can be
>> easily extracted (both visually and automatically).
>>
>> Just one note: please allow that the private variables of a class
>> (those that are not exposed outside the file) be declarable outside
>> the main definition of the class, that is with the . syntax. This will
>> completely make declaration and implementation independent, to the
>> point that the class definition is an interface and nothing else.
>
> This is what I'd like to see happen with modules which seems to be in
> agreement with what you are proposing: The module source file should
> contain everything needed to automatically generate and maintain a .di
> file. There should no need to manually maintain a .di file.
>

Leverage UDAs ?

> How we accomplish that goal is an implementation detail, however I fully
> agree that something needs to be done and it should be done without any
> need to manually maintain separate .di files.
>
> --rt


-- 
Dmitry Olshansky