digitalmars.D - -libpath?
- Jonathan Marler (17/17) Feb 06 2018 What do people think of adding an argument to DMD to add library
- Jonathan Marler (5/22) Feb 20 2018 no one responded to this, but I thought I would bump this to the
- Tony (6/20) Feb 21 2018 There is a tool that lets you call GDC and use DMD command-line
- Tony (4/8) Feb 21 2018 I am mainly thinking about being about to do -L/the/path/to/abc
- Mike Franklin (11/28) Feb 20 2018 Given the current state of things, and the issue described above,
- Jonathan Marler (18/51) Feb 21 2018 Interesting idea. Actually I don't think it's too late for this.
What do people think of adding an argument to DMD to add library search paths? Currently the only way I know how to do this would be via linker-specific flags, i.e. GCC: -L-L/usr/lib MSVC: -L-libpath:C:\mylibs OPTLINK: -L+C:\mylibs\ NOTE: the optlink version only works if no .def file is specified. If you have a .def file, then you can't add any library search paths :) If we added a new "linker-independent" flag to dmd, then you could add paths using the same interface regardless of which linker you are using. I'd expect the argument to be something like: -libpath=<some-path> The disadvantage is it would be another command line option added to DMD. If there is general agreement that this is a desirable feature, I'll go ahead and implement it.
Feb 06 2018
On Tuesday, 6 February 2018 at 17:49:33 UTC, Jonathan Marler wrote:What do people think of adding an argument to DMD to add library search paths? Currently the only way I know how to do this would be via linker-specific flags, i.e. GCC: -L-L/usr/lib MSVC: -L-libpath:C:\mylibs OPTLINK: -L+C:\mylibs\ NOTE: the optlink version only works if no .def file is specified. If you have a .def file, then you can't add any library search paths :) If we added a new "linker-independent" flag to dmd, then you could add paths using the same interface regardless of which linker you are using. I'd expect the argument to be something like: -libpath=<some-path> The disadvantage is it would be another command line option added to DMD. If there is general agreement that this is a desirable feature, I'll go ahead and implement it.no one responded to this, but I thought I would bump this to the front page to double check if there is any interest in this feature.
Feb 20 2018
On Wednesday, 21 February 2018 at 02:21:14 UTC, Jonathan Marler wrote:There is a tool that lets you call GDC and use DMD command-line options (gdmd). If it doesn't already exist, what about a tool that allows you to call DMD using GDC options (which I think are the same as gcc/g++/clang/clang++)?If we added a new "linker-independent" flag to dmd, then you could add paths using the same interface regardless of which linker you are using. I'd expect the argument to be something like: -libpath=<some-path> The disadvantage is it would be another command line option added to DMD. If there is general agreement that this is a desirable feature, I'll go ahead and implement it.no one responded to this, but I thought I would bump this to the front page to double check if there is any interest in this feature.
Feb 21 2018
Tony <tonytdominguez aol.com> On Wednesday, 21 February 2018 at 10:23:08 UTC, Tony wrote:There is a tool that lets you call GDC and use DMD command-line options (gdmd). If it doesn't already exist, what about a tool that allows you to call DMD using GDC options (which I think are the same as gcc/g++/clang/clang++)?I am mainly thinking about being about to do -L/the/path/to/abc and -labc as is done for the Linux C/C++ compilers.
Feb 21 2018
On Tuesday, 6 February 2018 at 17:49:33 UTC, Jonathan Marler wrote:What do people think of adding an argument to DMD to add library search paths? Currently the only way I know how to do this would be via linker-specific flags, i.e. GCC: -L-L/usr/lib MSVC: -L-libpath:C:\mylibs OPTLINK: -L+C:\mylibs\ NOTE: the optlink version only works if no .def file is specified. If you have a .def file, then you can't add any library search paths :) If we added a new "linker-independent" flag to dmd, then you could add paths using the same interface regardless of which linker you are using. I'd expect the argument to be something like: -libpath=<some-path> The disadvantage is it would be another command line option added to DMD. If there is general agreement that this is a desirable feature, I'll go ahead and implement it.Given the current state of things, and the issue described above, I think a linker/platform independent flag would be nice. However, I'd much rather have the compiler just be a compiler and not have to worry about all the intricacies building. IMO, the compiler should get out of the linking business altogether, and just generate object files. A separate build tool could then call the compiler, linker, and whatever else to do builds. But that ship has probably sailed. Mike
Feb 20 2018
On Wednesday, 21 February 2018 at 04:07:38 UTC, Mike Franklin wrote:On Tuesday, 6 February 2018 at 17:49:33 UTC, Jonathan Marler wrote:Interesting idea. Actually I don't think it's too late for this. It is too late for DMD to just be a compiler, but that doesn't mean the compiler can't be stripped out as a separate component that DMD interfaces with. This would just make DMD a build tool/compiler/linker wrapper/etc that interfaces with underlying components that could be invoked independently as well. In any case, DMD has evolved to make development more convenient, adding features in a monolithic fashion that could have otherwise been implemented using independent components as part of a suite of compiler software, not unlike LLVM. However, this requires a lot more effort, creating interfaces between each component that then need to be well-defined and maintained...sometimes you just want to provide a feature without going through all the grunt work to make it robust. I think this is a natural evolution of software. Most of it starts monolithic and components are pulled out as needed, and this can still be done for the D compiler.What do people think of adding an argument to DMD to add library search paths? Currently the only way I know how to do this would be via linker-specific flags, i.e. GCC: -L-L/usr/lib MSVC: -L-libpath:C:\mylibs OPTLINK: -L+C:\mylibs\ NOTE: the optlink version only works if no .def file is specified. If you have a .def file, then you can't add any library search paths :) If we added a new "linker-independent" flag to dmd, then you could add paths using the same interface regardless of which linker you are using. I'd expect the argument to be something like: -libpath=<some-path> The disadvantage is it would be another command line option added to DMD. If there is general agreement that this is a desirable feature, I'll go ahead and implement it.Given the current state of things, and the issue described above, I think a linker/platform independent flag would be nice. However, I'd much rather have the compiler just be a compiler and not have to worry about all the intricacies building. IMO, the compiler should get out of the linking business altogether, and just generate object files. A separate build tool could then call the compiler, linker, and whatever else to do builds. But that ship has probably sailed. Mike
Feb 21 2018