On Dec 16, 2007 1:11 PM, Gonzalo Garramuño <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In summary, thanks. But, no thanks. With all those problems I did not > even bother checking the speed.
I got a chuckle out of their self-description on http://www.ohloh.net/tags/build/make , which one might view as a short list of open source build tools. "Though it comes last in the arena of the build systems, we believe that Waf is a vastly superior alternative to its competitors (Autotools, Scons, Cmake, Ant, etc) for building software, and especially for open-source projects...." Yep, that's why it's in the top tier of Popular tools! :-) There's something to be said for tooting your own horn, but not to the extent of making oneself soft or complacent about a competitor's capabilities. I think the day that CMake has really "won" the build tool wars, we'll be seeing shelfs full of books at Barnes & Noble and tons of jobs listing it as a "must have" skill. I wonder where Waf thinks it is, relative to all of that. Happy with the $0 "we really don't have to bother with Windows" open source market? Cheers, Brandon Van Every _______________________________________________ CMake mailing list [email protected] http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
