On 19 Aug 2010 at 14:10, Gustavo Carneiro wrote: > See also: WAF http://code.google.com/p/waf/ > > It is also in Python, but is a lot faster than scons. It has some usability > problems (but scons does have them too), but it's a pretty useful tool to > know...
That is a very useful link indeed - thank you very much for posting it. Waf does solve two of my most pressing problems with scons (scalability and needing to separately install scons after python) but it does introduce a number of other failings, such as a very Unixy approach which doesn't gel well with Windows or MSVC at all and a clone of the autotools UI and philosophy which I have always detested as being braindead. It makes sense of course coming from the KDE developers where they were trying to get scons to work, but it was infeasible so they came up with Waf. Waf's documentation does make the very valid point that build systems ought not to be based around files but rather processes which receive input and generate output. That way things like distcc become easy as well as a load of other stuff because they now work with streams of data rather than files. Oh for a python based build system which does tick all the boxes at once! Thanks once again for the link, Niall -- Technology & Consulting Services - ned Productions Limited. http://www.nedproductions.biz/. VAT reg: IE 9708311Q. Company no: 472909. _______________________________________________ Cplusplus-sig mailing list Cplusplus-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig
