Yes! That is only one of the reasons to have that ability. Almost more important is automated reasoning about very large codebases. What are the global properties? Where are the "antipatterns" of use and can we fix them? Can we "lint" away large classes of defects? Even Stroustrup believes such tools would be useful for C++. On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 5:53 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d-announce <digita lmars-d- announce@ puremagic.com> wrote: > On 6/12/14, 10:40 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: > >> On 6/10/2014 12:35 PM, justme wrote: >> >>> On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 06:13:39 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: >>> >>>> Of possible interest. panel_systems_ programming_ in_2014_and_ beyond/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Andrei >>>> Of possible interest. http:// www.reddit. com/r/ programming/ comments/ 278twt/ Andrei >>> >>> IMHO, the coolest thing was when Rob Pike told about the tool they made for automatically upgrading user source code to their next language version. >>> >>> That should be quite easy to implement now in D, and once done, would give much needed room for breaking changes we feel should be done. Pike seemed to be extremely satisfied they did it. >>> On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 06:13:39 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:IMHO, the coolest thing was when Rob Pike told about the tool they made for automatically upgrading user source code to their next language version.That should be quite easy to implement now in D, and once done, would give much needed room for breaking changes we feel should be done. Pike seemed to be extremely satisfied they did it. >> >> Personally, I wouldn't be comfortable trusting such a tool. Besides, I find that upgrading a codebase to a newer language version is one of the most trivial tasks I ever face in software development - even in D. >> >> It's a cute trick, but not a worthwhile use of development resources. >> On 6/10/2014 12:35 PM, justme wrote:Personally, I wouldn't be comfortable trusting such a tool. Besides, I find that upgrading a codebase to a newer language version is one of the most trivial tasks I ever face in software development - even in D.It's a cute trick, but not a worthwhile use of development resources. > > I very much think the opposite, drawing from many years of hacking into large codebases. I'm completely with Rob here. On a large codebase, even the slightest manual or semi-manual change is painstaking to plan and execute, and almost always suffers of human errors. > > I got convinced a dfix tool would be a strategic component of D's offering going forward. > > > Andrei > > On 6/12/14, 10:40 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:I very much think the opposite, drawing from many years of hacking into large codebases. I'm completely with Rob here. On a large codebase, even the slightest manual or semi-manual change is painstaking to plan and execute, and almost always suffers of human errors.I got convinced a dfix tool would be a strategic component of D's offering going forward.Andrei -- John Carter Phone : (64)(3) 358 6639 Tait Electronics PO Box 1645 Christchurch New Zealand -- ------------------------------ This email, including any attachments, is only for the intended recipient. It is subject to copyright, is confidential and may be the subject of legal or other privilege, none of which is waived or lost by reason of this transmission. If you are not an intended recipient, you may not use, disseminate, distribute or reproduce such email, any attachments, or any part thereof. If you have received a message in error, please notify the sender immediately and erase all copies of the message and any attachments. Unfortunately, we cannot warrant that the email has not been altered or corrupted during transmission nor can we guarantee that any email or any attachments are free from computer viruses or other conditions which may damage or interfere with recipient data, hardware or software. The recipient relies upon its own procedures and assumes all risk of use and of opening any attachments. ------------------------------