From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id SAA08292; Thu, 15 Apr 2004 18:39:16 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA08022 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2004 18:39:14 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net (smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net [203.16.214.181]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i3FGdBYM000802 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2004 18:39:13 +0200 Received: from [192.168.1.200] (ppp117-181.lns1.syd2.internode.on.net [150.101.117.181]) by smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i3FGcrZq090770; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 02:09:09 +0930 (CST) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: GODI vs. Ocamake From: skaller Reply-To: skaller@users.sourceforge.net To: Markus Mottl Cc: skaller , caml-list In-Reply-To: <20040415094716.GA7039@fichte.ai.univie.ac.at> References: <005e01c421f5$2dd45210$ef01a8c0@warp> <1081943666.20677.685.camel@pelican> <20040414164957.GA24089@tallman.kefka.frap.net> <1081991111.20677.877.camel@pelican> <20040415094716.GA7039@fichte.ai.univie.ac.at> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1082047130.20677.1218.camel@pelican> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-4) Date: 16 Apr 2004 02:38:52 +1000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at concorde by Joe's j-chkmail ("http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr")! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 ocamake:01 sourceforge:01 2004:99 2004:99 knowles:99 ocamake:01 interscript:01 camlp:01 camlp:01 interscript:01 simplistic:01 outputs:01 fixpoints:01 outputs:01 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Thu, 2004-04-15 at 19:47, Markus Mottl wrote: > On Thu, 15 Apr 2004, skaller wrote: > > On Thu, 2004-04-15 at 02:49, Kenneth Knowles wrote: > > > > > Just so I don't leave anyone out, I'd say both ocamake and OCamlMakefile handle > > > (1) and (3) all at once. > > > > Yeah? How would they handle Interscript sources? > > What about Camlp4? > > No problem, OCamlMakefile handles them by letting the user specify a > preprocessor in a comment in the first line. See camlp4-example in > the distribution. That may work for camlp4 but not interscript. Interscript is a code generator, there is no simplistic 1-1 correspondence between inputs and outputs for which any make rule could be encoded. Make is all wrong, as I said before. Interscript is a new, correct concept for building systems. It uses fixpoints. It doesn't care what the outputs are --- they have to be tracked, but not specified. -- John Skaller, mailto:skaller@users.sf.net voice: 061-2-9660-0850, snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners