Why?

[Richard (Rikki) Andrew Cattermole]

On 05/04/2024 1:27 AM, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
> On Thursday, 4 April 2024 at 11:10:04 UTC, Richard (Rikki) Andrew 
> Cattermole wrote:
>>
>> On 05/04/2024 12:07 AM, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
>>> On Thursday, 4 April 2024 at 10:18:10 UTC, Richard (Rikki) Andrew 
>>> Cattermole wrote:
>>>> On 04/04/2024 10:55 PM, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
>>>>> https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/16348
>>>>>
>>>>> *sigh*
>>>>>
>>>>> /P
>>>>
>>>> I can certainly see it being used with shared libraries.
>>>
>>> If you mean shared code for libraries, I don't see how. Isn't dub the 
>>> *official* tool to use for library? What's the problem in revamping 
>>> the way dub download / organise / handle source distributions?
>>
>> No I meant shared libraries.
>>
>> Specifically the distribution of the source files that act as the 
>> interface to it.
>>
>> That way you have the .sar file and the .dll and that's everything you 
>> need to use it.
> 
> Aren't 'di' sources the target solution for library API? What's the 
> problem in distributing a zip or tar?
> 
> In C++ you usually have a specific "include" directory with all you 
> need, what's the burden in doing a zip with the shared library binary 
> and the 'di' directories?
> 
> /P

You can and probably will still zip them up.

Getting the number of files down makes it a bit easier to work with when 
moving them around or using it.

I may like the idea of it, but not enough to be arguing for it, so my 
main concern is making sure Walter isn't simplifying it down to a point 
where we will have issues with it.

I.e. recommending the spec should be a little more complicated than what 
the code he has written so far (my improved spec): 
https://gist.github.com/rikkimax/d75bdd1cb9eb9aa7bacb532b69ed398c