From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,aea4cc77526f5e4a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!newsfeed2.telusplanet.net!newsfeed.telus.net!edtnps82.POSTED!023a3d7c!not-for-mail Sender: blaak@METROID Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Separate Compilation in Programming Languages References: From: Ray Blaak Message-ID: Organization: The Transcend User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 18:10:54 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.66.252.228 X-Trace: edtnps82 1203703854 208.66.252.228 (Fri, 22 Feb 2008 11:10:54 MST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 11:10:54 MST Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19981 Date: 2008-02-22T18:10:54+00:00 List-Id: 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. 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.