Hi Gerardo,
Besides knowing about the dependencies that "gcc -MD" would
report, Tup's build artifacts also depend on the commands that
build them -- change a command in the Tup file or through
configuration or environment variables and the artifact is
rebuilt. Even better, if the command is some script that's in your
build tree, changing the script itself (or even anything in the
build tree that the script uses!) will rebuild the artifact. Tup
also handles dependencies well for generated source code, if you
do that. And none of this is dependent on some magic,
compiler-specific command-line switch.
--Robb
Gerardo Delgadillo writes:
I'm porting our ugly C++ Eclipse projects to tup. We have
many-many
libraries and executables. So, as a test, I ported a few
projects to tup
and it works great. However, a co-worker said why not use make
instead, and
I answered with "auto-dependencies and speed." He agrees with
the speed
part, but he states that make can do the dependency business, if
you
provide the right info, like *.cpp, *.h, *.d, etc. and using the
GNU -MD
flag to generate .d files.
What's your take on this eternal-debate?
--
--
--
tup-users mailing list
email: [email protected]
unsubscribe: [email protected]
options: http://groups.google.com/group/tup-users?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "tup-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tup-users/87h81v63qr.fsf%40llnl.gov.
