I was wondering how this could be done this afternoon. Thanks Mengu.

https://github.com/github/gitignore/pull/1444

2015-03-22 22:08 GMT+01:00 Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d < digitalmars-d@puremagic.com>:

> On 3/22/15 1:37 PM, Mengu wrote:
>
>> while we're at it, let's add D to this list: https://github.com/github/gitignore
>>
>
> That's be cool, any takers? -- Andrei
>

On Sunday, 22 March 2015 at 22:04:53 UTC, Mathias Lang wrote:
> I was wondering how this could be done this afternoon.
> Thanks Mengu.
>
> https://github.com/github/gitignore/pull/1444
>
> 2015-03-22 22:08 GMT+01:00 Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d <
> digitalmars-d@puremagic.com>:
>
>> On 3/22/15 1:37 PM, Mengu wrote:
>>
>>> while we're at it, let's add D to this list:
>>> https://github.com/github/gitignore
>>>
>>
>> That's be cool, any takers? -- Andrei

you're welcome :)

On Saturday, March 21, 2015 22:56:58 Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 3/21/15 8:54 PM, Daniel Murphy wrote:
> > "Andrei Alexandrescu"  wrote in message news:mel52r$252b$1@digitalmars.com...
> >
> >> I've left a comment recently at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/3087.
> >>
> >> So what's the deal with that? Whenever a new tool leaves some trash, do we chalk a circle on the pavement around it?
> >
> > We add it to the .gitignore, then forget about it forever.  Having a long gitignore doesn't cost us anything.
>
> ... but complicated/wrong clean rules in makefiles and clutter in ls. We should clean our shit. -- Andrei

Agreed.

- Jonathan M Davis

bOn Sunday, 22 March 2015 at 21:08:27 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 3/22/15 1:37 PM, Mengu wrote:
>> while we're at it, let's add D to this list:
>> https://github.com/github/gitignore
>
> That's be cool, any takers? -- Andrei

btw, i think it'd be good if dub would automatically include this .gitignore file to generated projects.

On 2015-03-22 02:15, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> I've left a comment recently at
> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/3087.
>
> So what's the deal with that? Whenever a new tool leaves some trash, do
> we chalk a circle on the pavement around it?

Not sure what you're complaining about. Shouldn't generated files be ignored? Or is the problem that they're not put in one single directory?

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 09:14:15AM +0100, Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 2015-03-22 02:15, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> >I've left a comment recently at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/3087.
> >
> >So what's the deal with that? Whenever a new tool leaves some trash, do we chalk a circle on the pavement around it?
> 
> Not sure what you're complaining about. Shouldn't generated files be ignored? Or is the problem that they're not put in one single directory?
[...]

Word on the street is that the recommended way is to put all generated files in a dedicated directory rather than mix them in with source files. Doing so has other side benefits, like being able to parallel build for multiple targets without stomping over each other (assuming the generated files get placed in their respective architecture's subdirectory), avoiding stray orphan generated files causing heisenbugs (stale object file getting linked into the program overriding symbols from the real object file -- I've actually run into this at work, and it's very frustrating).

But for Phobos, meh... just stick it in .gitignore and call it a day. No need to make such a big deal out of it. Tempest in a teacup.


T

-- 
Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence. -- Napoleon Bonaparte