On 28 January 2014 11:16, Manu <turkey...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 28 January 2014 01:47, Atila Neves <atila.ne...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> dub doesn't address my needs at all, but I've put crap loads of >>> time/energy >>> into the D extension for premake, which works well ( >>> https://bitbucket.org/premakeext), although for some reason has never >>> really gotten any attention from the D community :( >>> >> >> Never heard of the extension until now. >> >> >> >>> It generates cross-language build scripts (ie, C/C++ and D code all >>> together in the same project) for make and many popular IDE's. >>> I use it for large scale projects that involve C/C++ engine library, D >>> front end code, and other ancillary libraries bolted on the side. >>> >> >> That's cool, and I might make use of this when mixing D and C/C++. What >> dub does do really well is just making any source package available. I wish >> I had that plus the full features of a build system like CMake all under >> one roof. > > > premake does everything cmake does (that I care about), and also ticks > some boxes (that I make heavy use of) that cmake lacks; like supporting > games consoles and stuff like that. > I've never been happy with cmake, but premake is fairly nice, and it's > fully scriptable if it's idea of something is just not quite right. > > Only problem is, there's been heaps of development on premake, homing in > on premake5, mainly in terms of extensibility. But it's not yet available > as binary packages. My extensions for D and other IDE's and toolchains all > work against the trunk premake5 code. >
I should add, onthe plus side, premake is a single self-contained exe with no runtime dependencies. I typically build a binary, and just commit it to my project's bin/ folder, and it just works, so others that want to build my projects don't have to stuff around trying to build it.
