"Ant" <Ant_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message .
>
> I didn't think one would excludes the other (?)...
> (oh, you mean the main function must be removed?
> how about version(ddepcheckLIB){}else{main...})

Also I would make the switches to 'set' methods instead. I'll rather make another file :)

>
> Any way you cut it the print routine shouldn't be on the main function.
> (I my opinion)

A matter of taste, but I might do it. (They are only 3 lines each.)

Lars Ivar Igesund

In article <bomhpr$1agg$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Lars Ivar Igesund says...
>
>>
>> Any way you cut it the print routine shouldn't be on the main function.
>> (I my opinion)
>
>A matter of taste, but I might do it.

I'm glad we don't work on the same projects... ;)
(I give hell to my coleagues for things like that)

> (They are only 3 lines each.)

each!? you mean you have duplicated code?! ;)
(I give hell to my coleagues for things like that)

:)

Ant

"Ant" <Ant_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:bomiks$1blk$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> In article <bomhpr$1agg$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Lars Ivar Igesund says...
> >
> >>
> >> Any way you cut it the print routine shouldn't be on the main function.
> >> (I my opinion)
> >
> >A matter of taste, but I might do it.
>
> I'm glad we don't work on the same projects... ;)
> (I give hell to my coleagues for things like that)

Any special reason?

>
> > (They are only 3 lines each.)
>
> each!? you mean you have duplicated code?! ;)

No, there's two ways to print out the deps.

Lars Ivar Igesund

In article <bondjc$2g2q$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Lars Ivar Igesund says...
>
>> >A matter of taste, but I might do it.
>>
>> I'm glad we don't work on the same projects... ;)
>> (I give hell to my coleagues for things like that)
>
>Any special reason?

2 bigies:
- maintainability.
- reusability.

>> each!? you mean you have duplicated code?! ;)
>
>No, there's two ways to print out the deps.

(1)
depfile.printf(depmods[i] ~ " " ~ depfiles[i] ~ " " ~ depdepths[i] ~ "\n");

(2)
I thought we could do:
stdout.printf(toStringz(depmods[i] ~ " " ~ depfiles[i] ~ " " ~ depdepths[i] ~
"\n"));

or something like that.

Ant

Version 0.9.2 is now up.
Some code was moved out of main (courtesy of Ant).
A switch -p/--checkprivate was added. This will make
the app search through private imports too (for
diagnostic use only.)
I also fixed it so that infinite recursion is now impossible.
Also, it makes the search faster.

Also, the first iteration of ddepchecklib.d is up at http://www.igesund.net/larsivar/ddepchecklib.d

The module has a struct
ddepcheck with the following functions:

  void setCheckRuntime(bool value)
  void setCheckPrivate(bool value)
  void setSearchDepth(int newdepth)
  void addImportPath(char [] path)
  DepStruct getDeps(char [] file)

The DepStruct looks like this:

export
struct DepStruct {

  char [] filename;
  char [] modname;
  int [] depths;
  int numdeps;
  DepStruct [] dependencies;
}

I haven't tested this, so I expect it to have errors
all over the place (also I'm not very used to structs,
so I expect it to sport access violations like no other app.)

Lars Ivar Igesund

And version 0.9.3. Two small buglets were fixed
(one for dependency paths and one for "//" comments.)

Lars Ivar Igesund

"Lars Ivar Igesund" <larsivi@stud.ntnu.no> wrote in message news:bostke$1n75$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Version 0.9.2 is now up.

Version 0.9.4 is up. Only change is support for dmd 0.76 instead of previous versions.

Lars Ivar Igesund

"Lars Ivar Igesund" <larsivi@stud.ntnu.no> wrote in message news:bnt6e3$1624$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Has changed name to
> ddepcheck
> and can be found at
> http://www.igesund.net/larsivar/ddepcheck.d
>
> Some minor bugs has been fixed.
>
> Lars Ivar Igesund
>
>