On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 11:28 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > On 4/26/11 10:51 AM, Robert Clipsham wrote: [ . . . ] > > My current favorite build tool is redo - it's about 200 lines of python > > and build scripts are about 5 lines for entire projects. It supports > > full dependencies (a depends on b depends on c, c is changed, a, b, and > > c recompiled), parallel compilation etc. I've set mine up to need zero > > modification too when I add new files to my library. Heck, you can even > > write your build scripts in D! That said, they'll be rather ugly unless > > you port the python to D, once that is done you could write a beautiful > > build script using D, it's on my todo list for when I get some free > > time... (When is that btw? :D). > > > > https://github.com/apenwarr/redo more info at http://cr.yp.to/redo.html > > which is linked from the github page anyway. > > Interesting. It would be great if you tried your hand at expressing the > Phobos build (which is rather simple) with redo so we can see the result.
The blurb indicates it doesn't work on Windows unless you use Cygwin of MSYS, because although it is written in Python it relies on /bin/sh. If the rather grandiose claims of the redo README are even close to reality, then the purveyors really ought to ensure successful builds on all platforms as Waf and SCons do. Then they might gain traction and be in for the running. Currently I would say use Waf or CMake. -- Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:[email protected] 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: [email protected] London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
