Hi, > > From: Dan Sugalski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > There's nothing really past what make does. The reason for having our own is: > *) Make isn't everywhere (like windows) > *) Make on various platforms has different syntax (VMS, Windows, and Unix > are all different) > *) Not speaking for anyone else, but I find make's gotten rather creaky > a round the edges--after 20+ years presumably we can make things a bit better > *) Having the full power of perl in the build tool should give us a big > boost in utility. (Consider the difference between C macros and Perl source > filters) > *) It'll be really unfamiliar to everyone, which'll stop folks from falling > into old, non-portable habits.
If there is going to be a new build tool for perl6, i would suggest using something similar to Ant (http://jakarta.apache.org/ant/) Ant is not suitable for parrot of course (it requires Java) but its design is quite good imho. >From its webpage: > Ant is different. Instead of a model where it is extended with shell based commands, it is > extended using Java classes. Instead of writing shell commands, the configuration files > are XML based calling out a target tree where various tasks get executed. Each task is run > by an object which implements a particular Task interface. It tries to avoid executing shell commands (which is good if you want to be portable to places like Windows) and instead it comes with a predefined set of tasks (remove files, compile, etc..). that can be extended programming your own Task classes. This article: http://www.onjava.com/pub/a/onjava/2001/02/22/open_source.html does a very good job at giving you a feeling of how it works. In my limited expierence, this is something very similar to what we would need for parrot/perl6. Just my half a cent, Angel Faus [EMAIL PROTECTED] vLex.com
