Library standardization

[Sean Kelly]

== Quote from Bill Baxter (dnewsgroup at billbaxter.com)'s article
> e-t172 wrote:
> > Koroskin Denis a écrit :
> >> Current situation is, someone writes code, probably nice one, and it
> >> is added
> >> to main trunk. Problem is, interface is implementation driven, not
> >> otherwise.
> >> It is not discussed. And thats bad. Tests first, then code, Kent Beck
> >> said.
> >> Of course, implementation can affect interface, but only after trial.
> >
> > I have to agree on this one. As a side note, I definitely think we
> > *need* "real" header files (like .h files in C/C++), which separates the
> > API and his implementation. I see for advantages:
> I think the automatic .di generation is a better.  I just wish it
> generated human-readable output rather than stripping all indentation.

Same here.  In fact, I looked into modifying the front end to do this, but
unfortunately, it isn't so simple.  The output is effectively generated from
the syntax tree rather than "left in" as the input is analyzed.  What I've been
doing for Tango is running uncrustify on the .di files before packaging them
for distribution.


Sean