scope keyword - a maintenance nightmare?

[BCS]

Reply to Guenther,

> Deewiant Wrote:
> 
>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/dcompiler.html#interface_files
>> 
>> Unfortunately, this only separates interface descriptions from object
>> code. What
>> 
> Thank you for pointing that out!
> 
> It's a new feature too which I did not know about yet. It certainly
> wasn't there when I evaluated the language the first time.
> 
> Sounds pretty useful. Seems to be more or less what I wanted.
> 
> However, there is one thing left in the linked web page above like
> which I still find rather disturbing:
> 
>> But they are not required in the way that C++ header files are, and
>> they are not part of the D language. They are a feature of the
>> compiler, and serve only as an optimization of the build process.
>> 
> If they are not part of the language, then one is at the mercy of a
> compiler to provide them! And in fact, every compiler could do it its
> own way, using a different layout or even a different syntax if it
> wants to.
> 
> It therefore seems more like the "precompiled header files" feature of
> some C/C++ compilers to me: While clearly useful, not all compilers do
> support it, and precompiled header files are typically not compatible
> between the different vendor's implementations.
> 
> So let's hope .di files actually become part of the D language
> standard in a future revision of the language!
> 

It isn't quite as good as being part of the language, but .di files are just 
D code without the function bodies. If you ship object code, and a .di file, 
then the worst that can happen is that the end user needs to rename the file 
as a .d file. Heck, even if you use a compiler that doesn't generate .di 
files, you can still run your code through one that does and then use the 
files with whatever compiler you want.