Re: Separate Compilation in Programming Languages

[<adaworks@sbcglobal.net>]

"Ray Blaak" <rAYblaaK@STRIPCAPStelus.net> wrote in message 
news:ur6f4x3o3.fsf@STRIPCAPStelus.net...
>
> <adaworks@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>> Java has no separate compilation at all.
>
> Of course it does. It has no explicit syntax dedicated to describing separate
> compilation, but it doesn't need it. It is quite straightforward to make
> separate libraries, etc.
>
The issue is about dependencies.   When the class definition and the
class implementation are in the same file, any dependent units will
have to be compiled when there is a change in that file.    I don't
see any capability for managing this kind of dependency in Java.


> It's just that the closure is implicit, but it works well in practice since
> the compiler tells you if it can't find anything missing.
>
> You can still get the benefits of separate compilation by simply having
> reasonable subsystems (i.e. packages), proper information hiding and the
> like. Java build environments seem pretty decent with compiling only what is
> needed.
>
> It's like the problem is not really relevant with Java.
>
> -- 
> Cheers,                                        The Rhythm is around me,
>                                               The Rhythm has control.
> Ray Blaak                                      The Rhythm is inside me,
> rAYblaaK@STRIPCAPStelus.net                    The Rhythm has my soul.