Thanks for the quick response! I personally would like to have
that as an option for dmd as well, but if rdmd --build-only
works, I'll stick to that. Thanks again.
On Wednesday, 25 April 2012 at 18:00:58 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
"Ben Normoyle" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
I've seen this in a lot of places, and the only fix I've heard
of consistently is to give dmd all of your source files when
you compile.
dmd only compiles the files you give it.
However, when I run rdmd --build-only, it both finds test.d
and produces a valid executable.
My questions are these:
1) Why does rdmd --build-only work when dmd doesn't? Does it
implicitly pass both to the dmd compiler when it finds that
test2 is dependent on test?
Yes.
2) Is there some way to have dmd emulate this behavior of rdmd,
I hope so. Some people would like to see dmd start doing this,
at least as
an option. I don't know what Walter thinks of that though.
or would it be valid to build my executable with rdmd
--build-only?
Certainly. That's what I normally do.
