Stephen Deken wrote: > On 11/10/06, Sean O'Rourke <[email protected]> wrote: >> It seems to be a universal urge: Module::Build, Sconstruct, ... >> And yes, it is enormously hateful. Just be glad people haven't >> (that I know of) started using Rake (gag) to build project not >> written in Ruby. > > The name `rake` is just wrong, nomenclature-wise. It's not related to > `make` in any way except general function -- the file format is > different, the actions are different, the intent is different. Since
I do remember reading somewhere at the end of eighties/beginning of nineties a document describing a make replacement called "bake"... > it's bound more tightly to `ruby` than `make`, why not stick with the > crystal theme and call it something like `lattice` ?
