On Saturday 02 June 2001 03:05 am, Brian Ingerson wrote:
> I've been to hell and back. I've faced the depths of MakeMaker so
> that no Inline user need ever fear it again.
My condolences.
> For directories with no Inline code, use a regular Makefile.PL. That
> is, 'use ExtUtils::MakeMaker'.
>
> For directories *with* Inline code, use 'use Inline::MakeMaker' *and*
> change 'WriteMakefile' to 'WriteInlineMakefile'.
This is annoying! :-) It means I can't easily Makify.PL a project by
having Perl recurse my code tree and dump Makefile.PLs in place. I'll
need to figure out which kind of Makefile.PL to write in each
directory. I guess a simple grep for "use Inline" would do the trick,
though.
> This is my safety check. I could have continued to substitute my
> 'WriteMakefile' for the real one, but I've decided there's no point.
> It will just cause confusion in the long term. ExtUtils and Inline
> are now mutually exclusive in this regard.
:-( So much for Grand Unified Theories of Makefile.PL.
To change subjects from grousing to cheering: what a lot of thinking
and work you put in! Thanks for saving us from the same repeated
efforts.
I'm vaguely contemplating an ISLM for Scheme, particularly DrScheme
from my alma mater: http://www.cs.rice.edu/CS/PLT/ since it has a lot
of embedding support already. Would anyone be interested in discussing
the matter?
Cheers,
--binkley
