<>
> The problem with make is javac has a stupid startup time, so is best called
> with 30+ files at
> once. Make likes to call things sequentially. ant is designed to call javac
> once with
> all the filenames.
That's why I use Jikes :)
___
devl ma
<>
> The problem with make is javac has a stupid startup time, so is best called with 30+
>files at
> once. Make likes to call things sequentially. ant is designed to call javac once
>with
> all the filenames.
That's why I use Jikes :)
___
devl mai
Matthew Toseland writes:
>
> --6TrnltStXW4iwmi0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Disposition: inline
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 11:59:50AM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > I would like to encourage those still using the Makefile an
Matthew Toseland writes:
>
> --6TrnltStXW4iwmi0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Disposition: inline
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 11:59:50AM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > I would like to encourage those still using the Makefile a
On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 11:59:50AM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote:
> I would like to encourage those still using the Makefile and "make" to
> switch to Ant (downloadable from http://jakarta.apache.org/ant/),
> as it is a pain to have to update both Makefile and build.xml when
> modifications are made,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 29 August 2002 15:17, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 11:59:50AM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > I would like to encourage those still using the Makefile and "make" to
> > switch to Ant (downloadable from http://jakarta.apach
On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 05:41:01PM -0500, Timm Murray wrote:
> > More powerful than GNU make? That's difficult to believe... but we don't
> > use make as make, we basically call a shell script.
>
> GNU Make works very well for C files on a *nix-like system.
I will probably regret getting into thi
On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 05:41:01PM -0500, Timm Murray wrote:
> > More powerful than GNU make? That's difficult to believe... but we don't
> > use make as make, we basically call a shell script.
>
> GNU Make works very well for C files on a *nix-like system.
I will probably regret getting into th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 29 August 2002 15:17, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 11:59:50AM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > I would like to encourage those still using the Makefile and "make" to
> > switch to Ant (downloadable from http://jakarta.apac
On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 09:17:44PM +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> More powerful than GNU make? That's difficult to believe... but we don't
> use make as make, we basically call a shell script.
Well, it is certainly easier to do more complex stuff with Ant than with
make, obviously you could prob
On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 09:17:44PM +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> More powerful than GNU make? That's difficult to believe... but we don't
> use make as make, we basically call a shell script.
Well, it is certainly easier to do more complex stuff with Ant than with
make, obviously you could pro
On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 11:59:50AM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote:
> I would like to encourage those still using the Makefile and "make" to
> switch to Ant (downloadable from http://jakarta.apache.org/ant/),
> as it is a pain to have to update both Makefile and build.xml when
> modifications are made,
I would like to encourage those still using the Makefile and "make" to
switch to Ant (downloadable from http://jakarta.apache.org/ant/),
as it is a pain to have to update both Makefile and build.xml when
modifications are made, and Ant is more powerful, and easier to
use than make.
Some advice
I would like to encourage those still using the Makefile and "make" to
switch to Ant (downloadable from http://jakarta.apache.org/ant/),
as it is a pain to have to update both Makefile and build.xml when
modifications are made, and Ant is more powerful, and easier to
use than make.
Some advic
14 matches
Mail list logo
