On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 04:16:20PM -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On 9/24/14, 3:47 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote: > >I've been thinking of that too! I have in mind a hybrid between tup > >and SCons, integrating the best ideas of both and discarding the bad > >parts. > > > >For example, SCons is notoriously bad at scalability: the need to > >scan huge directory structures of large projects when all you want is > >to rebuild a tiny subdirectory, is disappointing. This part should be > >replaced by Tup-style OS file change notifications. > > > >However, Tup requires arcane shell commands to get anything done -- > >that's good if you're a Bash guru, but most people are not. > > Well, what I see here is there's no really good build system there. So > then how can we interpret your long plea for dropping make like a bad > habit and using "a properly-done" build system with these amazing > qualities? To quote: > > >I wish I could inspire them as to how cool a properly-done build > >system can be. Automatic parallel building, for example. > >Fully-reproducible, incremental builds (never ever do `make clean` > >again). Automatic build + packaging in a single command. > >Incrementally *updating* packaging in a single command. Automatic > >dependency discovery. And lots more. A lot of this technology > >actually already exists. The problem is that still too many people > >think "make" whenever they hear "build system". Make is but a poor, > >antiquated caricature of what modern build systems can do. Worse is > >that most people are resistant to replacing make because of inertia. > >(Not realizing that by not throwing out make, they're subjecting > >themselves to a lifetime of unending, unnecessary suffering.) > > So should we take it that actually that system does not exist but you > want to create it? [...]
You're misrepresenting my position. *In spite of their current flaws*, modern build systems like SCons and Tup already far exceed make in their basic capabilities and reliability. Your argument reduces to declining to replace a decrepit car that breaks down every other day with a new one, just because the new car isn't a flawlessly perfect epitome of engineering yet and still needs a little maintenance every half a year. T -- Indifference will certainly be the downfall of mankind, but who cares? -- Miquel van Smoorenburg