Daniel Gibson <[email protected]> wrote: > Am 13.02.2011 20:01, schrieb gölgeliyele: >> I don't think >> supporting multiple compilation models is a good thing. >> > > I think incremental compilation is a very useful feature for large projects so > it should be available. > Also the possibility to link in .o files that were generated from C code with D > programs is a must - so only supporting the model of feeding all .d files to dmd > is not an option. > > But not supporting the model of feeding all .d files to dmd is very useful and > should be possible. > > So *I* /do/ think that supporting multiple compilation models is a good thing :-) >
Ok, I might have misspoken there. I am not against incremental compilation. What the heck, the lack of it is the reason I started the thread. However, I would like to see a coherent compilation model. Feeding all .d files to the compiler does not necessarily mean that it needs to be a from-scratch compilation. Isn't the need for tools like xfBuild an indication that something is wrong here. If you can point me to a write up that describes how to setup an incremental compilation for a large project, without using advanced tools like xfBuild, that would be very helpful.
