On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 22:39, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> Ideally we would not need to list the information separate from the > source file. What should happen is the BuildSystem parses each source file, > determines what includes are used and then passes to the compiler exactly > the correct -I and no extra. Or as alternative the BuildSystem behaves > like CPP and actually puts the exact full path for each include into the > source code just before passing it to the compiler. This takes the whole > bothersome problem of the compiler searching through the -I paths to find > the first include file with the same name and including it. In other words > BuildSystem takes on more parts of the compile process away from the > untrustworthy UNIX tools for compiling and linking. I agree with the rest of your mail, but not this part. I think that the build environment should be managed in essentially the same way for library source code and examples. I also think it's important that examples be relocatable to a user's own project and built with simple tools. If the build system is doing goofy preprocessing, then users won't be able to build it easily with their own tools. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20111115/569d5029/attachment.html>
