On 09/25/2014 02:49 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
Make-heads find the idea of the compiler being part of the input to a
build rule "strange"; to me, it's common sense.
Yes. This is exactly why (unless it's been reverted or regressed? I only
mention that because I haven't looked lately) RDMD counts the compiler
itself as a dependency. Because:
$ dvm use 2.065.0
$ rdmd stuff.d
[compiles]
$ dvm use 2.066.0
$ rdmd stuff.d
[silently *doesn't* recompile?!? Why is *that* useful?]
Is *not* remotely useful behavior, basically makes no sense at all,
*and* gives the programmer bad information. ("Oh, it compiles fine on
this new version? Great! I'm done here! Wait, why are other people
reporting compile errors on the new compiler? It worked for me.")
