On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 23:35, David Cournapeau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > Short story: it would make my life simpler to have two mandatory > scons scripts per package instead of only one. Long story: for some > reasons linked to scons' notion of build directory, having two scons > scripts files per package (instead of one) would simplify quite a bit > some parts of numscons, as well as simplifying the addition of custom > builders (for swig, cython, etc...) by other people. One of the two > files would basically be exactly the same as the current one, and the > other one independent of the package (always the same 3 lines). This is > a bit ugly, but less ugly than the actual contortions I have to do to > make scons and distutils play nice together. > Is there any strong feeling against this ?
Can you give me a longer story? What are the three lines? Why are they necessary in a separate, boilerplate file? -- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." -- Umberto Eco _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
