On Sunday 06 February 2011 18:05:27 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > Again, all we need to do is use a different macro than the default one. > In hindsight, using D_Ddoc is a mistake as the user does not want to > generate docs for Phobos but she does want to import stuff from it.
So, essentially we decide to treat druntime and Phobos differently with regards to documentation by using a different macro on the assumption that no one wants to build their ddoc documentation normally? I'm not sure how this really solves the problem. Anyone who is building their own code with version(D_Ddoc) blocks will find the problem relatively quickly but they at least will then know how to fix it (don't build your code with -D and generate your documentation separately). For projects that _don't_ have that problem but use druntime and Phobos, wouldn't they either just use prebuilt libraries for them or use druntime and Phobos' makefiles when building them, at which point whether they use -D on their project or not has nothing to do with druntime or Phobos. Or am I missing something here? Are people building druntime and Phobos without their makefiles? Then again, I'm not entirely clear how Rainer ran into this problem in the first place. I would expect this to be a problem when you're building code with -D _and_ that code uses version(D_Ddoc) _and_ you want to build the code, not the documentation. Other than that, I don't see how it would be a problem. That being the case, if people either use the released binaries for druntime or phobos, or if they use the makefiles that come with them (as you'd expect), then there is no problem. Unless they're building druntime and/or phobos _with_ the documentation with the idea that they'd _also_ use the binaries, but that seems unlikely to me. - Jonathan M Davis _______________________________________________ dmd-beta mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
