http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=11365
--- Comment #7 from Leandro Lucarella <[email protected]> 2013-10-30 08:41:42 PDT --- (In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #4) > > I just updated the title of the issue, arbitrary extension names should be > > allowed for the same reason. > > So you're the one adding this. What benefit do you see with arbitrary > extensions? First, it worth mention that the extension problem with C++ only happened to C++ for historical reasons. There is no reason to think it will happen to D as it doesn't happen in any other language that is flexible in terms of naming files. The reason of having an arbitrary file NAME (the extension is just an artificial separation of a file name) is the same mentioned in the issue description. The compiler have no reason to limit how can I name files. Why if I want to create a script that's called "dlang.org". For some reason I might have a system to fetch stuff from websites and call the scripts after the host name. The moment D tries to pretend it can be used for scripting is the moment D lost its right to place limitations on file naming. Is that simple. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
