If the in rust approach is chosen, I warmly recommend checking out some of the design ideas in Shake. Shake has a pretty nice design that allows for dynamic build deps (in make systems the way around that is to use make to make your make files), and a few other neat ideas, including but not limited to playing nice with ninja files (which I believe cmake can generate too).
http://community.haskell.org/~ndm/shake/ http://hackage.haskell.org/package/shake On Friday, January 10, 2014, George Makrydakis wrote: > > Hello, > > Having a build system entirely dependent of Rust alone, would make the > entire experience in deploying the language extremely cohere. The only > counter - argument is indeed that it would require some work to get this to > fruition. I would like to know if this has any chance of getting priority > soon enough. > > G. > > Corey Richardson <co...@octayn.net> wrote: > >Hey all, > > > >The build system has grown a fair bit of complexity, and is getting > >hard to understand. I've been thinking about what could replace it > >moving forward. Most of the complexity stems from having to self-host > >(ie, staging) and cross compilation (which target are we compiling > >for, and with which host?) > > [...] > > >3. Write a build system in Rust. > > > >This would take care of everything for us, using ourselves. We'd have > >a small script fetch the snapshot and build the build system, and then > >hand off the rest of the build to it. This has the advantage of one > >less build-time dependency, but the disadvantage that it's going to be > >a lot of work. This could also potentially output tup, ninja[3], or > >another form of build script after taking configuration options and > >so-forth. It could also integrate with librustc for smart handling of > >comments-or-test-only changes, an issue near to my heart[4]. This > >build system could potentially be rustpkg, but as I understand it the > >current idea is to *remove* rustpkg's ability as a build system and > >keep it as a package manager. (At least, that is what I've understood > >of recent discussion; this could be wrong.) > > [...] > _______________________________________________ > Rust-dev mailing list > Rust-dev@mozilla.org > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev >
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
