From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-07-24 19:00:14
DA> I saw that paper, but it lacks specific examples of how anything
True enough. Once you get to moderately complex, however, I think you are
going to just have to get the book....or trick someone into mapping it out.
DA> Would you like to volunteer to put something preliminary together
DA> that uses IMAKE? Then we could evaluate it against other options.
I guess I should have seen that freight train coming before I got on the
I'm pretty busy, but I may be able to find a few hours over the next
couple weeks to try out a demonstration. That is, unless someone else comes
up with a better strategy in the next couple days.
Of course, IMAKE isn't going to solve that runtime validation which I
think was part of your original query and I think is really key. To make
Boost really useful I want to compile Boost with all optimizations (or
whatever combination I choose) with whatever compiler, on whatever OS, and
still be reasonably sure that Boost still runs correctly...ideally by just
running the test suite. Perhaps, however, that should be a different
DA> Yes. As far as I can tell, even a Make expert has to "learn a new
DA> make system" for each new project.
I would agree that the developer of a Makefile has to understand a
different system, but the user doesn't need to know much. For example, I
usually expect to be able to change to a directory and type make (or in VCC
hit the "build" button) and have everything that "needs to" compile just
will. I expect to have a way to clean up all derived files (make clean),
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk