Closed dbuenzli closed 10 years ago
I find the Dir
component name a bit confusing anyway, I think we should rename it Files
.
Why not but it's a little bit strange to specify a dir name for Files
(especially if we wanted to allow Dir
s in a Dir
).
Actually I think the documentation of Dir
reads pretty well. But we could say that the Files
component installs the build artefacts of contents
in a given directory, but the actual definition of what is installed in a given directory would be non-immediate, you'd have to union all the Files
that install to the same directory to understand what will be installed in that directory. I think I still prefer Dir
.
Right, feel free to revert my commit. I just thing the fact that `Dir could either means source dir or target dir could be a source of confusion.
Yes, we should distinguish somehow, I'm still pretty convinced Dir
is quite an understandable component (tried to imagine others Pack
, Build_dir
, but I think it's what makes the most sence). Maybe we could use Loc of string
for Assemblage.unit
.
Currently unit generation is rather implicit by looking in the
~deps
argument if there's anOther
component. I'm not sure it's a very good idea. We should indicate in a clear manner whether we look in the source tree of if we look into the artifacts of anOther
. So I think that rather than the current:we should have:
it's more verbose but I prefer verbose than too implicit (a good rule of thumb is if you fail to explain easily the docs, then it's likely you have it wrong). And remember we have
let
in our description language. One thing I dislike about the above proposal is the possible confusion with the[Dir of dir ]
component.Src_dir
, bof.