From: John Maddock (jm_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-11-05 06:42:14
> Now that's just silly, and I daresay somewhat distressing. We went to
> all this effort to provide a reasonably powerful programming language
> in Jam which allows you to avoid writing the same thing over and over
> again; you could clean this all up with a few lines of Jam code, and
> instead you add a layer of scripting on top which generates the
> "usual-quality" machine-generated code. I just can't understand why
> that's preferable.
Well because I understand shell scripts (and makefiles for that matter), a
lot more thoroughly than I do the Jam language, sorry, but I'll tend to use
whatever is quickest to put together :-(
Better versions are always welcome though...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk