On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Russel Winder <rus...@winder.org.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-06-17 at 13:28 -0700, Adam Murdoch wrote: > […] > > Thanks for writing this up. It would be great to see this addition to > the native support. More comments below. > […] > > Quick sanity check: people are using the term "native support" but isn't > what people mean here "C and C++ support". Yes, we're using the term 'native' as a not very good descriptor for the Gradle support for building applications in C, C++, Assembler, Objective-C, Objective-C++ and Windows Resources. Unfortunately, we haven't come up with a better term to describe this set of functionality > Native code languages such as > Go, D, Rust have very, very, very different approaches to build compared > to C and C++ (*, **). > Can you elaborate a little on this? Is it the way the source code is built into a binary that is different, or the type of output that is created, or both? Where does Assembler fall into this mix? Do these other languages as a group follow a consistent pattern, or are they each fundamentally different from each other? Thanks for any overview you could give. Daz
