On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 17:41:38 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 17:37:39 UTC, sigod wrote:
>> On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 17:32:15 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
>>> No, it is not an rdmd bug.
>>>
>>> "etc" is a standard D package name reserved for Phobos, the standard library. It is the same for "std" and "core".
>>
>> Please, point us directly to a documentation where it says that this words reserved.
>
> http://dlang.org/phobos/ ?
> (you don't expect to casually use package names "std" and "core" either, do you?)

Actually, I never got to use this names for first package name. (I only used `<something>.etc` and `<something>.core`.) So, I didn't thought about this.

But, if to think about it know:
`std` - no.
`core` - yes.
`etc` - yes.

It isn't documented. So, why should I think that this is reserved package names? Actually, I myself never thought that there's exist such thing as "reserved package name".

Isn't it better to document such things? Less questions will arouse. Less users will stumble on strange errors.

On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 18:23:25 UTC, sigod wrote:
> Isn't it better to document such things?

Yes. Please create a pull request.

On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 18:23:25 UTC, sigod wrote:
> Actually, I never got to use this names for first package name. (I only used `<something>.etc` and `<something>.core`.) So, I didn't thought about this.

`<something>.etc` and `<something>.core` should work fine. Only the three top-level package names are reserved by rdmd for Phobos/Druntime.

On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 18:12:44 UTC, novice2 wrote:
> On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 17:32:15 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
>> "etc" is a standard D package name reserved for Phobos, the
>
> Thanks for explanation.
> I not be able to undertsand the cause - weird error message.
> Now i can easy fix my code.
>
> BTW, did rdmd determine user code or standard library by sorce file pathes?
> Or it those names must be hardcoded?

The top-level package names (std, etc and core) are currently hard-coded in rdmd.

On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 17:41:38 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 17:37:39 UTC, sigod wrote:
>> On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 17:32:15 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
>>> No, it is not an rdmd bug.
>>>
>>> "etc" is a standard D package name reserved for Phobos, the standard library. It is the same for "std" and "core".
>>
>> Please, point us directly to a documentation where it says that this words reserved.
>
> http://dlang.org/phobos/ ?
> (you don't expect to casually use package names "std" and "core" either, do you?)

Why not? If I want to amend the standard library, e.g. for testing a module that's not yet present in my compiler version, or for fixing an error? I think it's useful to be able to override individual modules by placing a copy of them into your project's directory.

On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 18:41:58 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
> On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 17:41:38 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
>> On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 17:37:39 UTC, sigod wrote:
>>> On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 17:32:15 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
>>>> No, it is not an rdmd bug.
>>>>
>>>> "etc" is a standard D package name reserved for Phobos, the standard library. It is the same for "std" and "core".
>>>
>>> Please, point us directly to a documentation where it says that this words reserved.
>>
>> http://dlang.org/phobos/ ?
>> (you don't expect to casually use package names "std" and "core" either, do you?)
>
> Why not? If I want to amend the standard library, e.g. for testing a module that's not yet present in my compiler version, or for fixing an error? I think it's useful to be able to override individual modules by placing a copy of them into your project's directory.

For the record, rdmd handles this particular case just fine. You can run unit tests on any one Phobos module with "rdmd -main -unittest module.d". The package exclusion list only applies to imported modules.

On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 18:43:35 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 18:41:58 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
>> On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 17:41:38 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
>>> On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 17:37:39 UTC, sigod wrote:
>>>> On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 17:32:15 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
>>>>> No, it is not an rdmd bug.
>>>>>
>>>>> "etc" is a standard D package name reserved for Phobos, the standard library. It is the same for "std" and "core".
>>>>
>>>> Please, point us directly to a documentation where it says that this words reserved.
>>>
>>> http://dlang.org/phobos/ ?
>>> (you don't expect to casually use package names "std" and "core" either, do you?)
>>
>> Why not? If I want to amend the standard library, e.g. for testing a module that's not yet present in my compiler version, or for fixing an error? I think it's useful to be able to override individual modules by placing a copy of them into your project's directory.
>
> For the record, rdmd handles this particular case just fine. You can run unit tests on any one Phobos module with "rdmd -main -unittest module.d". The package exclusion list only applies to imported modules.

But imported modules are the important case. If I have an important bugfix in a module, and don't want to wait for the next release, what am I supposed to do?

I don't know how rdmd works exactly, but AFAICS `dmd -deps` already outputs the full paths of the imported files, recursively. Isn't that enough?

On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 18:55:08 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
> But imported modules are the important case. If I have an important bugfix in a module, and don't want to wait for the next release, what am I supposed to do?

Rebuild Phobos. If rdmd were to compile your module, linking would fail due to duplicate symbols.

> I don't know how rdmd works exactly, but AFAICS `dmd -deps` already outputs the full paths of the imported files, recursively. Isn't that enough?

rdmd also needs to know which directory contains Phobos sources.

On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 18:28:32 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> On Saturday, 23 August 2014 at 18:23:25 UTC, sigod wrote:
>> Isn't it better to document such things?
>
> Yes. Please create a pull request.

Easy to say. In my TODO list lies record to create PR for [this issue][0]. Today is exactly 2 months as it was created.

[0]: https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12986