Dominique, I used to work for Landmark several years ago, and I'm curious if it uses Ant to handle any of the builds. The last OpenWorks class I took, make was the preferred tool. Also, are there any Java-based, or mixed Java/C++ apps at Landmark now?
Regards, Mark Fortner --- Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From: Kreinick, Michael H. > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > I'm looking into various alternatives for building > a set of products, > > written in a mix of C++ and Java (with some JNI). > The products need to > > build > > under Windows, Solaris, and Linux using various > compilers for each > > platform. > > They also need to be built with different versions > of their library > > dependencies, then regression tested. > > > > I know Ant does have C++ build tasks. What worries > me is whether Ant, > > designed with Java's build-once-run-everywhere > model in mind, will work > > well > > to build the same source 5 or 10 different times. > I've never used Ant > > before, and I haven't done as much reading as I > perhaps should have, but > > it > > seems ill-suited to this kind of problem. I get > the impression that if I > > hack hard enough I can make it happen, but that it > won't be very clean > > because of the Java philosophy Ant takes for > granted. > > > > I've looked for examples of this type of use on > the Web and list with no > > luck. It seems few people are trying to use Ant > for C++ at all, and none > > that I found are trying to do what I'm trying to > do. > > > > So: Is Ant C++ support mature enough that I should > even be thinking about > > using it for this? Has anyone out there tried the > same kind of thing? > > Would > > any experienced users like to offer a sketch of > how they would go about > > it? > > Will I be fighting the Ant project model all the > way? > > > > I'm also looking at sCons and boost.Jam for this. > If anyone has other > > suggestions, they'd be welcome. > > I've looked at boost.Jam, and found it too complex > for my linking. Don't > know about sCons. I'm an Ant guy, who has done > makefile (GNU Make, IMake, > Make, etc...) and I don't regret switching to Ant at > all. Being a VIM user, > I've been interested in A-A-P, which is Python based > and has all the smarts > of Bram behind it ;-) > > For someone with no Ant experience, it's a steep > climb up the Ant + CppTasks > learning curve, but from my point of view, if you > have Java & JNI & C++, Ant > is the clear winner. The Ant community is active and > helpful, and the > CppTasks community, although much smaller, well > exists ;-) > > I'm a bit bias to Ant, and don't know all the other > systems, but Ant is > mature, CppTasks works great for me (builds large > C++ and JNI libs on > Windows, Linux, Solaris). Ant is so easy to extend > (for me at least ;-) in > Java, I can always do what I want. > > Case in point: After being burned a few times by > developers editing javah > generated headers, I now automatically generate them > on the fly, with proper > dependency checking and all, as past of the build > process. They're not even > checked in anymore, and never out-of-date. I'll make > that public eventually. > > So in short, yes, Ant doesn't excel at native build, > but it's doing more > than OK, and it's very flexible / extensible (if > you're a Java guy like me). > > Beyond that, it's all a matter of taste and whether > the tool does it for you > or not. --DD > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
