Monorepo?

[H. S. Teoh]

On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 04:48:51PM +0000, Mathias LANG via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Monday, 6 February 2023 at 10:22:32 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
> > Now that dmd/druntime is in one repo, is there a good reason to not
> > include Phobos?
> 
> Because it will inevitably lead to circular dependencies, something
> Walter is already complaining about.
> 
> There was an advantage in merging DMD and druntime: They are tightly
> coupled, and we often enough situations where you had to merge a PR in
> one repo to see if things were working in the other. We don't have
> that requirement in Phobos.

OTOH there have been a good number of occasions in the past where
changes in DMD/druntime had to be coordinated with Phobos. Even today,
I'm almost certain that you can only use a specific version of Phobos
with a specific version of DMD; it's likely to fail compilation or
behave incorrectly otherwise.


T

-- 
The fact that anyone still uses AOL shows that even the presence of options doesn't stop some people from picking the pessimal one. - Mike Ellis