Hi, On 2001.06.09 00:49:46 -0400 Diane Holt wrote: > --- David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I've seen frequently "ant is no good for c++", and I wonder why. I had > > no trouble writing a (linux/gcc) c++ compilation for an admittedly not > > enormous (about 80-90 files) project using apply for cpp > o and execon > > for linking. It doesn't have the extensive lists of dependencies > > sometimes found in make files, but then javac doesn't have that kind of > > dependency checking either. So just why is make better? > > How did you deal with header-file changes?
Aha, now I'm learning. I didn't. (this was to replace a make file on a project that has experienced few changes, which is probably why I didn't realize this problem). Are there other problems? david jencks > > Diane > > > ===== > ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 > a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ >
