CTFE and DI: The Crossroads of D

[deadalnix]

Le 10/05/2012 18:56, Steven Schveighoffer a écrit :
> There is already a better tool -- cp. I ask again, what is the benefit
> of .di generation if it is mostly a glorified (faulty?) copy operation?
>

Please stop with that cp argument, this is complete bullshit.

> As Adam points out in his original post, ensuring CTFE availability may
> not be (and is likely not) why you are creating a .di file.
>

You want to create a di file to hide implementation of some 
functionality to the user of you lib. The better approach is to mark 
such code as this.

Note that in C/C++ you maintain headers manually. It is already a big 
improvement.

> Plus, what isn't CTFEable today may be CTFEable tomorrow.
>

Good point.