Hi
Thanks for the replies. It seems that some people do have concerns about SCons.
I think that CMake may be a better choice for us. We don't need the
cross-platform capability but if CMake has more comprehensible configuration
files and solves the #include dependency checking problem, that wo
On 19 Aug 2010 at 14:10, Gustavo Carneiro wrote:
> See also: WAF http://code.google.com/p/waf/
>
> It is also in Python, but is a lot faster than scons. It has some usability
> problems (but scons does have them too), but it's a pretty useful tool to
> know...
That is a very useful link indeed
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 18:02, Niall Douglas wrote:
[...]
>
> As Nat said, bjam is the core of Boost Build but Boost adds a lot to
> it. I've always found it lacking in configurability personally, and
> like Nat I'm also not fond of its syntax either - much like CMake
> too. I will say though that
