Bill Ward wrote:
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 1:06 PM, Steffen Schwigon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Bill Ward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
But to my mind, the may problem with M::B is that it's moving away
from the traditional Unix concept of using "make" to install things.
A lot of Perl is about platform-independence. Probably even more than
other languages that occupied this cliché ad nauseam. "make" is not.
Platform independence is not a priority for me.
Nor me really, cos all I use is Unix, and my main audience for my
software is either my workplace or me. But it's nice to be able to
support other people too if it's not too much work. For some odd
reason, I've recently had more useful bug reports and patches from
Windows users than from normal people - and yes, they were bugs that
would affect Unix too.
> All that really means
is "Windows compatible" since Mac OS and Linux are Unix variants these
days, and the only other widely used OS is Microsoft, which I have no
desire to encourage. Legacy mainframe/minicomputer OS's are of no
interest to me either, and are mostly either obsolete or
Unix-compatible anyway.
Even if you only care about Unix-a-likes, you still need to remember
that GNU make, Sun make, SGI make, etc are only partially compatible.
Then consider that GNU software tends to break in stupid ways from one
release to another, and older versions of make may support fewer
features than whatever version you (and Schwern) are developing against.
GNU have even managed to break *cp* and *rm* from one release to the
next, so I treat GNU make with suspicion - it's far more complex, so far
more likely to get a visit from the Fuckup Fairy.
--
David Cantrell | Official London Perl Mongers Bad Influence
All children should be aptitude-tested at an early age and,
if their main or only aptitude is for marketing, drowned.
