Re: [Boost-users] Scons users?

From: Dieter Rosch (dieterr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-13 17:24:12

At work we run scons and regular makefile systems on AIX. In the beginning I
was a big proponent of scons. But I hate it now: It is INCREDIBLY slow on
large systems, even when you want to compile just one file, it seems to
build the entire dependency tree before compiling. Python is cool - Scons I
don't use anymore unless I'm ordered to.

-----Original Message-----
From: boost-users-bounces_at_[hidden]
[mailto:boost-users-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Thore Karlsen
Sent: 13 September 2005 16:21
To: boost-users_at_[hidden]
Cc: boost_at_[hidden]; jamboost_at_[hidden];
boost-users_at_[hidden]
Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Scons users?

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 18:46:08 +0500, Alex Besogonov <cyberax_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

> >> On the Boost.Build list we were just discussing the fact that some
> >> people otherwise inclined towards Boost have chosen Scons over
> >> Boost.Build.  It would be useful for us to understand some of the
> >> reasons why, if some of you wouldn't mind letting us know.  No flames,
> >> please!

>Well, SCons supports distributed building and binary repositories -
>that's a MAJOR selling point. And Python is much nicer than jamfiles.
>
>PS: there's also mxx_ru (http://eao197.narod.ru/mxx_ru/) it's a build
>system based on Ruby - it has some interesting features worth attention. 
>Unfortunately, its documentation is only in Russian, but this should not
>be a problem for Vladimir Prus  :)

Another Python-based build system I like a lot is A-A-P
(http://www.a-a-p.org). I haven't played much with SCons, but judging
from the SCons documentation, A-A-P is a lot more powerful. I've found
A-A-P to be indispensable for my builds, as well as other things like
web page publishing.

-- 
Be seeing you.
_______________________________________________
Boost-users mailing list
Boost-users_at_[hidden]
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users