Quoting Brandon Van Every <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Dec 16, 2007 1:11 PM, Gonzalo Garramuño <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In summary, thanks. But, no thanks. With all those problems I did not
even bother checking the speed.
I got a chuckle out of their self-description on
http://www.ohloh.net/tags/build/make , which one might view as a short
list of open source build tools. "Though it comes last in the arena
of the build systems, we believe that Waf is a vastly superior
alternative to its competitors (Autotools, Scons, Cmake, Ant, etc) for
building software, and especially for open-source projects...." Yep,
that's why it's in the top tier of Popular tools! :-) There's
something to be said for tooting your own horn, but not to the extent
of making oneself soft or complacent about a competitor's
capabilities. I think the day that CMake has really "won" the build
tool wars, we'll be seeing shelfs full of books at Barnes & Noble and
tons of jobs listing it as a "must have" skill. I wonder where Waf
thinks it is, relative to all of that. Happy with the $0 "we really
don't have to bother with Windows" open source market?
It's not only waf does not care about Windows but they explicitly do
not want to support it. That's the reason why KDE4 is using CMake
instead of SCons or waf.
--
Pau Garcia i Quiles
http://www.elpauer.org
(Due to my workload, I may need 10 days to answer)
_______________________________________________
CMake mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
