On Saturday, 12 August 2017 at 06:06:33 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Saturday, 12 August 2017 at 06:02:57 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
Sounds reasonable, the compiler could check if paths start with a -J path.

There is a potential ambiguity here:

dmd -Jsomedir test.d

test.d: import("somedir/file.txt");

Does the user mean to import "somedir/file.txt" or "somedir/somedir/file.txt"? Currently the latter is understood. Simply checking for path prefix would break this case. I guess this could be done only with absolute paths, but that introduces an inconsistency with relative paths. I'm not sure it's worth it, considering it's easy to work around.

What is the inconsistency? Absolute paths are specific and well defined and so are relatives. Relatives are always relative to J, are they not?

so, import("somedir/file.txt"); obviously means somedir/somedir/file.txt.

If you wanted somedir/file.txt you would do import(`file.txt`).

I see no problem here. With absolute paths, one simply checks if the absolute base path matches the absolute base path specified by J. If it matches, then it passes and can be used directly or removed internally. If not then an error is given.




should pass all pass.


should all fail.

(I'm only using .. for reference, not sure if they should actually be supported)

It seems quite simple to me

Any relative paths specified by import are prepended with the path specified by -J. Any absolute paths specified by an import are first matched to the path -J simply by


if (J_path.length < basepath.length) assert("Import path must be located in the same path that is specified by -J");

if (basepath[0..J_path.length] != J_path) ditto; // makes sure absolute path is in the -J path. This is the check that is missing from dmd.

(this doesn't resolve ..'s, that could be done before and assumes basepath is an absolute path)

Reply via email to