Am Fri, 19 Mar 2010 17:09:50 +0100
schrieb Thorsten Behrens <[email protected]>:

> too long a silence around this important topic for my taste 
You know: If the kids are quiet, something is up ... ;)

Mba and I continued to work/evaluate on cmake and GNU/make. I did work
mostly on windows and it works basically, but there are still things to
decide regarding dllexport/visibility. Windows is especially brain-dead
in some regards[1]. There are a few solutions to consider for this
problems, but I certainly want to get rid of cumbersome hacks like the
"filter-lists" we are currently using here and there (which make us
link every such dll twice -- once to get the symbols and once to really
link). In addition to being a performance-hog and being simply ugly,
this is also causing a lot of really bad reexports (like fwi and fwe
re-exporting most of cppuhelper). It also leads to lots of
"interesting" differences depending on inlining, debug-builds etc.


> - so let me tease you folks with this here new kid on the block:
> 
> http://aruiz.synaptia.net/siliconisland/2010/03/buildj-build-configuration-for-the-mases.html

Meh. Waay to young for my taste, although replacing autoconf is a noble
effort. I also liked the idea behind
http://code.google.com/p/quagmire/ but it seems to be struck in a
quagmire (pun intended), since there is little work going on.
Lets see where BuildJ is in one or two years (or when it is adopted by
a major project (gnome)). However, using BuildJ on top of waf on top
of Python isnt exactly lean (how does that go through a python 2.x ->
3.x -> 4.x migration?)

You where right to complain about the silence on the build env topic.
Blog posts by Mathias (I guess) and me are coming your way RSN.


Best Regards,

Bjoern
  

[1] for example:
http://www.codesynthesis.com/~boris/blog/2010/01/18/dll-export-cxx-templates/


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to