--- Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 26, 2003 at 07:40:57PM +0000, Salvador Fandi�o wrote: > > A new version of the "C++ support for MakeMaker" patch is ready. > > The more I think about this the more nervous I get at putting all > this new functionality into MakeMaker in a part that's not very > well understood > (XS module building) while I'm trying to wind down development. > > Sorry to ask this so late in the process, but is there a good > reason this couldn't be done with Module::Build instead? > And "because lots of people use MakeMaker" isn't one of them.
well, Module::Build biggest strength is that it�s a pure Perl module that doesn't depend on an external tool like make but for C/C++ modules you will need a development environment anyway and using make is not a problem at all. Actually, most C/C++ developers should feel more comfortable using and customizing ExtUtils::MakeMaker/make than Module::Build and not because EU::MM has been there forever and M::B is new but because they can look at the generated Makefile and understand it. For example, I have a SWIG based module that builds with EU::MM and that has a simple make rule to generate the .c file from a .i SWIG file. Could I have done the same which M::B easily? I doubt it, I would have to understand M::B internals, for EU::MM I only need to know how to add a rule to the generated Makefile. Bye, - Salva.
