On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 12:55 PM, Jonathan S. Shapiro <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 10:25 AM, Matt Rice <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I was curious if there was a little magic, >> so, I tried "import foo.bar", with "interface bar" in the directory foo. >> to see if i had to change the interface if i wanted to change the >> directory, >> I wasn't all that suprised when it didn't work, but ran into a compile >> error > > > Matt: > > I certainly agree that this shouldn't be asserting, and I'll get that > resolved. > > I'm not quite sure what you mean by "laziness" here. The intention is that > -I adds a search root to the module resolution path. The problem I'm having > with your description is that (assuming the assert did not happen) I'm not > sure what behavior you were expecting. Can you explain that?
by laziness I mean: only having to change N 'imports', instead of 'N imports + 1 interface' if one were to change the directory structure housing the bar.bitc. thus: if 'interface bar' upon import would append the imported interface to the path to the file imported with slashes turned to dots. its bad idea. opens up the whole #include <foo/foo.h> vs #include <foo.h>/-Ifoo/ world of hurt. _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
