On Wed, 07 Dec 2011 14:38:04 +0100 Jacob Carlborg <d...@me.com> wrote:
> What I see as the advantage of a new build system is that it can be > developed specifically for D which could make the tool very easy to > use. Example: > > $ tool build main.d > > That's all that should be needed to build an executable. You could > have the same in a build script: > > // buildfile > main.d > > $ tool build > > For a library it should be similar: > > $ tool build foo > > Where "foo" is a directory. I don't know if that's possible to have > in a build tool not specifically developed for D. Hmm...isn0t it too simplistic? For our project, we have need to e.g. buil lib from the included sources of 3rd party C library, then use SWIG to provide D bindings for it, then build D libs using those bindings and only then buil D executable. That's why we're targetting CMake/CPack and want to help Jens to push D support upstream(the only problem is we're a bit short on time atm.) Sincerely, Gour -- As the ignorant perform their duties with attachment to results, the learned may similarly act, but without attachment, for the sake of leading people on the right path. http://atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
