Header files???

I noticed that D is not planning to support header files. Will it be more like Java where both the declarations and definitions are in the same file. If so, I think that could be a big mistake. I personally file header files useful as a visual interface to my classes and functions without having to pour through so much miscilanious implementation code. Also header files are needed for distribution of libraries where you don't feel like distributing your source code. Anyway, just thought I'd add my two cents. Everything else about D seems real nice. Thanks.

Not to mention that closed-source libraries are often distributed as headers and compiled object code. Would it be possible for D to read the implementation/source code and then generate a 'header' for purposes of distribution & linking? - Brent > I noticed that D is not planning to support header files. Will it be more like Java where both the declarations and definitions are in the same file. If so, I think that could be a big mistake. I personally file header files useful as a visual interface to my classes and functions without having to pour through so much miscilanious implementation code. Also header files are needed for distribution of libraries where you don't feel like distributing your source code. > > Anyway, just thought I'd add my two cents. Everything else about D seems real nice. Thanks. >

Actually, D will work if you make a "header" by replacing the function bodies with ;. It's just that you don't have to do it that way. Brent Schartung wrote in message <9m4em5$6jo$1@digitaldaemon.com>... >Not to mention that closed-source libraries are often distributed as headers >and compiled object code. Would it be possible for D to read the implementation/source code and then generate a 'header' for purposes of distribution & linking? > > - Brent > > > >> I noticed that D is not planning to support header files. Will it be more like Java where both the declarations and definitions are in the same file. If so, I think that could be a big mistake. I personally file header files useful as a visual interface to my classes and functions without having to pour through so much miscilanious implementation code. Also header files are needed for distribution of libraries where you don't feel like distributing your source code. >> >> Anyway, just thought I'd add my two cents. Everything else about D seems real nice. Thanks. >> > >

I'm glad to hear that. Will there be different file extentions for declaration and implementation files or just .d for everything. Perhapse .dh or something. Thanks for the info. Walter wrote: > Actually, D will work if you make a "header" by replacing the function bodies with ;. It's just that you don't have to do it that way. > > Brent Schartung wrote in message <9m4em5$6jo$1@digitaldaemon.com>... > >Not to mention that closed-source libraries are often distributed as > headers > >and compiled object code. Would it be possible for D to read the implementation/source code and then generate a 'header' for purposes of distribution & linking? > > > > - Brent > > > > > > > >> I noticed that D is not planning to support header files. Will it be more like Java where both the declarations and definitions are in the same file. If so, I think that could be a big mistake. I personally file header files useful as a visual interface to my classes and functions without having to pour through so much miscilanious implementation code. Also header files are needed for distribution of libraries where you don't feel like distributing your source code. > >> > >> Anyway, just thought I'd add my two cents. Everything else about D seems real nice. Thanks. > >> > > > >

Erik Rounds wrote: > I'm glad to hear that. Will there be different file extentions for declaration and implementation files or just .d for everything. Perhapse .dh or something. I think that they all should be .d files - you don't really want to make a distinction between normal source and these headers. In fact, these headers might be a mix of simple source code (wrappers) and links to external functions. Publish a .d file for the declarations, and a .o file for linking.

And what would be even better than that would be to just distribute the .o file, and have the compiler automatically open it up and figure out the class and function declarations. The newfangled IDE could also open up a D .o file and show browse information, inheritance tree or whatever. Old school programmers on out-of-date computers could always ship a "fake" header file with their library, so people could check out the interfaces without having to fire up an IDE. Or a command-line tool could "extract" the header from the .o file kinda like dumpbin. Header files are so unnecessary it hurts. Sean "Russ Lewis" <russ@deming-os.org> wrote in message news:3B8696EE.579EC10E@deming-os.org... > Erik Rounds wrote: > > > I'm glad to hear that. Will there be different file extentions for declaration and implementation files or just .d for everything. Perhapse .dh > > or something. > > I think that they all should be .d files - you don't really want to make a distinction between normal source and these headers. In fact, these headers > might be a mix of simple source code (wrappers) and links to external functions. > > Publish a .d file for the declarations, and a .o file for linking.