Fabien Costantini wrote:
> Since the beginning you started this work, I have the feeling it could be a
> great alternative to the ide vs project files, provided that some more
> (probably tricky) work is achieved.
>
> More precisely, it would be great to reuse the existing Makefiles, and use a
> batch that changes/add the following:
> - the makeinclude file by a ms vs one with all ms vs tools related defs
> - a ms_configure.cmd file similar to your existing configure.bat file
> - the gmake exe tool as you use it now(with some gpl copyright attention).
Yes, getting the Makefiles merged would be very tricky though.
DOS is very dumb. And combined with its ancient need for
backslashes and limited scripting abilities, would really
dumb down and corrupt the unix side of the Makefiles.
The lack of common unix commands like touch, rm, mv, etc.
and the syntactical limitations of DOS make for awkward limitations
on common tasks.
In my mind it's an (unhealthy) challenge to work within the
limited confines of native DOS, to avoid the worse situation
of having to depend on a full blown msys/cygwin environment.
This is likely why FLTK never supported CLI compiling for
Visual Studio; DOS scripting is abhorrent to unix folks,
and dumbing down the unix makefiles was surely out of the question.
I took this on because a decade of DOS programming in the 80's
warped my mind enough that I'd prefer programming Makefiles in DOS
to using the Visual Studio IDE.
> It should definitely be possible to invoke the vs compiler tools with proper
> gmake variables,
> then we would truly reuse the existing Makefile's ...
>
> Am I dreaming ?
Yes, though currently the Makefiles are quite different.
Lots of unix specific stuff in the ones that come with FLTK,
which is why I had to make them separate. The Makefiles are
so different, it's hard to imagine them completely merging.
But surely they could share some common files between them.
Like the entire contents of my src/gmake-fltk-include..
I could easily see that being common across the platforms.
But backslashes always seem to get in the way of this,
compounded by DOS's limited string handling.
DOS has some 'extensions' that enable some almost bash level
string handling within strings, like search and replace (wow),
but alas those features are not supported by older revs of
Windows that FLTK supports.
_______________________________________________
fltk-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
