Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [going OT] build tool design, was: tlator-0.1 initial release

[Samium Gromoff]

At 18 Sep 2003 15:44:25 +0200,
Robin Farine wrote:
> 
> >>>>> "MJ" == MJ Ray <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>     MJ> On 2003-09-18 04:55:13 +0100 Doran Moppert
>     MJ> <address@hidden> wrote:
>     >> funny how better-designed tools get both support and resistance from
>     >> the same
>     >> people in different contexts :). Not that I can talk -- I still use
>     >> Make [...]
> 
>     MJ> I have problems understanding why people consider alternatives like
>     MJ> cons and scons better designed.
> 
> Make doesn't allow one to create individual components that perform
> well defined tasks while encapsulating the details. In some ways, it

   Starting with make-3.80 it have some additions, which, as i recognize,
 are targetting this very issue.

   I mean $(eval ) $(call ).

> In a complex enough project, the makefiles become such a big pile of
> rules and variables, one hardly knows where a variable will change,
> where it will be expanded, if a name is free or already used

   Variable expansion is controlled by

        `:=' vs `='

> somewhere. Look in detail in the glibc build system for a good
> example. Yes, it's using recursive make calls but building this thing
> without recursion is left as an exercise to the make guru out there.

[snip]

> -- 
> rnf

regards, Samium Gromoff