|
|
Glas :Re: [glas] build-system for glas |
From: Karl Meerbergen (Karl.Meerbergen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-01-11 08:36:32
Hi,
Waf is python based. What are the advantages compared to scons?
Whatever the choice of build system is, I think it is important that
fortran should also be able to be compiled. I recall that we (at FFT)
had some problems with making bindings to blas 1 functions on some
platforms. The only way to circonvent this was making a subroutine in
fortran and using this in the blas backend. Perhaps I should first check
whether this is still the case and identify more precisely what the
problem was.
However, another point is that we will also perform performance tests on
various platforms. Ideally these will be performed with the same build
system as the regression tests. I would like to make comparisons with
some fortran codes, not just other c++ or c codes.
Karl
Philipp Schwaha wrote:
>might I suggest you take a look at waf:
>http://freehackers.org/~tnagy/bksys.html
>
>greetings
> Philipp
>
>On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 11:18 -0500, Neal Becker wrote:
>
>
>>On Thursday 04 January 2007 10:33 am, Simon Perreault wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Toon Knapen wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Opinions?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>The KDE project recently switched to CMake (http://www.cmake.org). It
>>>was a huge success. CMake is cross-platform, easy to learn and use, and
>>>has proven powerful enough to handle one of the biggest open-source
>>>projects around.
>>>
>>>
>>I have been quite happy with scons.
>>_______________________________________________
>>glas mailing list
>>glas_at_[hidden]
>>http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/glas
>>
>>
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>glas mailing list
>glas_at_[hidden]
>http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/glas
>
>
Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm