Quoting Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
beefing
up CMake with PCRE and a few more string processing routines is an
obvious and easy improvement to the product.
I'm working on that, by the way.
PCREs have been actually easy to implement, including your wishes
about outputting the
On Tuesday 18 December 2007, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
...
There is one thing which discourages me, though: nobody from Kitware
commented on the interest of PCREs, what the deadline for PCREs to
be included in CMake 2.6.0 would be, nothing.
I think one requirement would be that the pcre
Quoting Alexander Neundorf [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Tuesday 18 December 2007, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
...
There is one thing which discourages me, though: nobody from Kitware
commented on the interest of PCREs, what the deadline for PCREs to
be included in CMake 2.6.0 would be, nothing.
I
On Dec 16, 2007 2:55 PM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 16, 2007 1:54 PM, Alexander Neundorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sunday 16 December 2007, Brandon Van Every wrote:
Meanwhile I just keep expanding my search radius, asking various build
system communities the OO
On 2007-12-17 20:30-0500 Brandon Van Every wrote:
When I peruse http://www.ohloh.net/tags/make I notice that most of the
Popular! make-like tools have a particular implementation language
associated with them. If you want a make written in Java, you use
Ant. If you want it in Ruby, you use
On Dec 17, 2007 10:35 PM, Alan W. Irwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BUT autotools were first to market in the Linux world so there are still a
large number of Linux projects that continue with autotools. However, my
guess based on obvious technical superiority, the possibility of porting to
On Dec 17, 2007 11:02 PM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess you have no fear of a Disruptive Technology biting you in the ass.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_technology
I prefer to keep my eye on the 8-ball.
http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~ssanty/cgi-bin/eightball.cgi
On 2007-12-17 23:02-0500 Brandon Van Every wrote:
I guess you have no fear of a Disruptive Technology biting you in the ass.
That is correct. Disruptive technology by definition is overwhelmingly
superior, and I like such technology and don't fear it in the least. Also,
I am comfortable
On Dec 17, 2007 10:35 PM, Alan W. Irwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
people and projects are strongly voting with their feet
despite (and this is an extremely important consideration) virtually
everybody absolutely hating to change build systems.
Here, I think it's more important to concentrate on
On Dec 17, 2007 11:51 PM, Alan W. Irwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2007-12-17 23:02-0500 Brandon Van Every wrote:
I guess you have no fear of a Disruptive Technology biting you in the ass.
That is correct. Disruptive technology by definition is overwhelmingly
superior,
I'm not sure you
On Dec 18, 2007 12:42 AM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some of those low-end
things like JRake are even getting traction. There's a constellation
of blog entries about them. It performs significant work despite not
having 51 person-years into it.
It occurs to me that Java and
11 matches
Mail list logo
