Well, we've had an Imake based system in place for years for C++ systems. Then we started using Ant for java based systems. But for systems that have a mix of java and C++, we integrated Ant to our Imake rules. Now, the Imake system can build C++ code as it always did, and invoke Ant to build java.
I agree with the concept that we should keep Ant focused on its original mission - java code. I see no reason to burden Ant with C++ building when perfectly good tools exist for doing that. I think it's better to wisely use a set of tools, than to demand one tool do every thing. "Russell, Mark" wrote: > > Just think of the case where your trying to integrate JNI C++ code with Java > code, and you'd like to build them all with the same build system. That is > really the main reason (in my mind) for a c++ task for Ant > > MAR > > -----Original Message----- > From: Les Hughes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 04:06 > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: RE: C++ tasks > > Hi, > > Feel free to shoot me down in flames but doesn't VC++ have a perfectly good > build system in nmake? And for multithreaded speeded up stuff what about > clearmake (with ClearCase). > > (Oh dear, what have I started....) > > Bye, > > Les > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Curt Arnold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 11 October 2001 03:50 > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: C++ tasks > > > > > > > I'm hoping to begin work on this again soon (in the next > > few weeks) but my > > > intent includes a substantial rewrite of the initial task. > > Mostly because > > I > > > want to speed the task up so I intend to include multithreading > > capabilities > > > into the task. For now though this is still in design with coding > > hopefully > > > to start end of month. > > > > Speed is a very good thing. > > > > > > > > If needed I can repost both Adam and My tasks to the list > > or else email > > them > > > direct to you. > > > > I'd appreciate your sending them to me. > > > > > > > > One word of warning is that the linker part of my task does > > not function > > > properly on Sun Workshop, other then that everything should > > be working > > > > My primary interest is driving the Microsoft Visual C++ > > compiler on Win32. > > > > I'd appreciate your thoughts on compile speed minimization. > > If compilation > > is processor-bound and you aren't on a multiprocessor system, > > I wouldn't > > think that multiple threads would gain you any performance. Though a > > thread-per-processor would probably be appropriate. > > > > Definitely, I would think that you would want to minimize the > > number of > > processes created (that is not exec a new process for each > > .c[pp] file) and > > minimize the number times CL.EXE is loaded. > > > > Would the same optimizations be appropriate for gcc or other > > C++ compilers, > > other platforms? > > > > Any thoughts on dependency checking? > >
