From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=SoKhYFgYCSKsZtAG8L9oeCW-jG=8Grvo7h+ww@mail.gmail.com>
References: <773C7824-C50D-49EE-9CF8-74E91515F2F3@corpus-callosum.com>
	<bb4fd0152d5ccdb8acf49ae0d7b3f4d5@terzarima.net>
	<AANLkTi=SoKhYFgYCSKsZtAG8L9oeCW-jG=8Grvo7h+ww@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri,  5 Nov 2010 14:50:22 +1100
Message-ID: <AANLkTikvTbqLwrxifri86cAEBS3wmknrSWaxtmrk11Ni@mail.gmail.com>
From: Bruce Ellis <bruce.ellis@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [9fans] Plan9 development
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 77272314-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

mash has a make builtin. very brief, as all the shell type stuff in mk
goes away..

brucee

On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Venkatesh Srinivas <me@acm.jhu.edu> wrote:
>> one interesting thing about that example is that if it were done again
>> for the Plan 9 environment, mk might well be even smaller, since
>> some of the existing functionality isn't really used,
>> or might be achieved by simpler mechanisms, or with functionality
>> added instead by further composition with other programs;
>> alternatively, it might be redone in a radically different way.
>>
>
> How would you rewrite mk to be simpler?
> Thanks,
> -- vs