On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 09:03:12AM +0200, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > On 2013-08-12 00:38, H. S. Teoh wrote: > > >Maybe my previous post didn't get the idea across clearly, so let me > >try again. My underlying thrust was: instead of maintaining 3 > >different makefiles (or more) by hand, have a single source for all > >of them, and write a small D program to generate posix.mak, > >win32.mak, win64.mak, whatever, from that source. > > If it's written in D it will have the same bootstrap problem. But > perhaps that's ok since we're moving DMD to D anyway. [...]
Well, yes, we're moving DMD to D anyway, so we're going to face the bootstrap problem regardless. But that's not really what I'm getting at. My whole point was to have a "single source of truth" for how to build what needs to be built, instead of scattering it across 3+ makefiles that need to be maintained separately. T -- Never wrestle a pig. You both get covered in mud, and the pig likes it.
