Subject: Re: [boost] Announcement: Faber, a new build system based on bjam
From: Domen Vrankar (domen.vrankar_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-12-03 00:12:34
2017-12-03 1:02 GMT+01:00 Peter Dimov via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>:
> Domen Vrankar wrote:
> > Since Faber is meant to be a cross platform build system and CMake is a
>> > build system generator you could perhaps start by competing with other >
>> build systems by attempting to integrate Faber into CMake as yet another >
>> build system along side Makefiles, Ninja...
> This makes no sense because Faber is an alternative to CMake. If you still
> have to use CMake, there's no point in using Faber.
> In other words, Faber competes with CMake, not with the CMake backends.
> Faber is not a backend, it's a frontend.
And as I said as a front end it doesn't really add anything worth
mentioning - just puts a different make up on it. If I have two ice creams
that taste the same I just waste more energy without getting any benefit -
alternatives would have to provide considerable meaningful differences at
least from the start before they start converging on each other as they
steal ideas from one another. I was just hoping that there is something non
obvious that makes the two a bit more different than creating a new tool
just for the sake of it and competing with Makefiles/Ninja instead of CMake
front-end syntactic sugar would possibly be that hidden non obvious thing
that would get my attention - a far fetched hope that was proven wrong.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk