Explain your current build system and how is works. I have used nmake for quite some time now and love how it is architected. It can be used to solve many a problem. I have used it solve standard C/C++ build issues as well as build issues with databases, perl, java, and other related software that needs to be constructed from source.
It is quite easy to extend and its core engine is very powerful. Tom ________________________________ From: Norman Ramsey <[email protected]> To: Glenn Fowler <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2009 9:07:09 PM Subject: Re: [ast-users] worlds collide -- using AST tools with non-AST software (how to config?) > are you trying to > 1) use nmake :PACKAGE: or > 2) replicate what nmake :PACKAGE: does without using nmake or > 3) fix a problem with nmake :PACKAGE: or > ? 2 and ? I would like to replicate what nmake :PACKAGE: does without using nmake, since I am trying to cut down on build-system dependencies. This decision is partly at the behest of my colleague and partly because I continue to have difficulties getting bin/package to work the way I expect, which leads me to wonder whether I can distribute something based on AST that others will be able to build on systems different from mine. The ? is that I have gotten quite interested in understanding the details of how nmake works. I am hoping to persuade the Glasgow Haskell Compiler project either to switch to nmake or to incorporate some of nmake's good ideas into their own build system. Growing a formal model of nmake seems like a good next step, and :PACKAGE: is a not entirely random place to pull. Norman _______________________________________________ ast-users mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/ast-users
_______________________________________________ ast-users mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/ast-users
