On 31 Mar 2011, at 14:26, michael.vancann...@wisa.be wrote:
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011, Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 31 Mar 2011, at 13:29, Marco van de Voort wrote:
1. they are mostly generated anyway. The .fpc files are the info,
not the
makefiles themselves.
I still prefer those Makefile.fpc files very much to the fpmake.pp
files.
The idea is to completely get rid of make.
I know, but I was not discussing that (although I'm not a big fan of
doing so either, but I know that's a done deal). What I said was
"Sticking to the Makefile.fpc format (or any other structured format)
and then automatically generating something else from that (be it
plain Makefiles, fpmake.pp or whatever) would make it much easier to
maintain the actual build instructions, I think."
It is possible to stop supporting make without switching to manually
writing and maintaining fpmake.pp programs themselves. I don't think
that allowing the full flexibility of an arbitrary Pascal program as
build instructions a good idea, because it makes maintenance harder
and makes it less easy to get a quick overview of what is built/done.
Jonas
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
