DIP10005: Dependency-Carrying Declarations is now available for community feedback

Joseph Rushton Wakeling via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Wed Dec 14 04:15:20 PST 2016


On Wednesday, 14 December 2016 at 12:01:40 UTC, Mathias Lang 
wrote:
> That was my impression when reading this DIP. I'm very glad to 
> see that decoupling made its way up in the growing list of 
> things to do, my only concern is that this syntax sounds like a 
> workaround for giant modules.
>
> Phobos is cited as a motivation for this enhancement. Dare I 
> say that we have a problem of modules in phobos being too 
> monolithic, and they should be split into more packages, like 
> std.range and std.algorithms did ?

Yea, I think you put your finger on it: almost all of the stuff 
this feature could help achieve in Phobos could be just as well 
achieved by splitting stuff up better.

Note, `std.range` and `std.algorithm` could still be much more 
modularized than they currently are.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list