Compiler updating user code
John Colvin
john.loughran.colvin at gmail.com
Fri Mar 14 05:07:24 PDT 2014
On Friday, 14 March 2014 at 11:44:21 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote:
> "Manu" <turkeyman at gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:mailman.105.1394774104.23258.digitalmars-d at puremagic.com...
>
>> So it comes up fairly regularly that people suggest that the
>> compiler should have a mode where it
>> may update user code automatically to assist migration to new
>> compiler versions.
>>
>> I'm personally against the idea, and Walter certainly doesn't
>> like it, but it occurred to me that a
>> slight variation on this idea might be awesome.
>>
>> Imagine instead, an '-update' option which instead of
>> modifying your code, would output a .patch
>> file containing suggested amendments wherever it encountered
>> deprecated code...
>> The user can then take this patch file, inspect it visually
>> using their favourite merge tool, and pick
>> and choose the bits that they agree or disagree with.
>>
>> I would say this approach takes a dubious feature and turns it
>> into a spectacular feature!
>
> If you're using version control, these are practically the same
> thing.
Yeah, I don't understand why it matters whether it's a change or
a patch. Either way, all changes become patches in VCS. Who would
let an automated tool make source changes without using VC, or at
least having made a manual backup?
Also, making a direct change allows the user to use whatever diff
software / version control software they like.
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list