On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Ryosuke Niwa <rn...@webkit.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 1:17 AM, Jochen Eisinger <joc...@chromium.org>wrote: > >> Another option is to add a webkit-patch command for modifying the build >> files. That way, the syntax doesn't need to be overly human friendly. There >> was also some attempt to write a tool to add files automatically: >> https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=61772 I would expect that such >> a tool becomes easier if it would only modify one source of truth and >> generates all other artifacts such as Xcode projects from it. >> > > I don't want build file's syntax to be so human unfriendly that I need a > tool for it. > > Often times, these syntax problems can be improved dramatically by simple > changes. e.g. we had a similar discussion about TestExpectation syntax, and > I'm much happier with the new syntax even though the new syntax is > functionally equivalent to the old one, and two syntaxes are very similar. > I totally agree. I guess I just failed at finding the right words. -jochen > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 1:17 AM, Mark Rowe <mr...@apple.com> wrote: > >> I’ve experimented with this in the past and you’re right that it >> shouldn’t be particularly difficult to do. However, I suspect that the task >> would be similar in scope to defining an improved syntax for gyp. And if >> the syntax is the primary sticking point with gyp then it’d seem preferable >> to tackle initially. >> > > Yeah. In fact, we can just come up with whatever syntax we like and > convert it to the existing gyp format if the syntax was the biggest issue. > > - R. Niwa > >
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
