On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Nick Wellnhofer <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes, let's give it another try. My main goals for now are
>
> * Mechanism to find all .cfh files that belong to a prerequisite
>   parcel without parsing every file in the include directory tree.
> * Mechanism to find a file's parcel (.cfp file) given its path
>   (mainly in source directories).
>
> I still favor an approach where every parcel lives in a completely separate
> directory. This would make both of these goals easy to achieve.

Let's go with that plan.

I suggest that the parcel dirs in "include" directories be required to follow
the naming convention "PARCEL-VERSION".  That will make it possible to know
what parcels are available without having to parse every .cfp file.

For "source" directories in contrast, any top-level dir could contain any one
arbitrary parcel.

I suggest that we also consider special-casing unit tests somehow.  I think we
should avoid forcing them to belong to another parcel, denying them access
to internal symbols and excluding the possibility of white-box testing.

Marvin Humphrey

Reply via email to