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 XAA18262; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 23:01:02 +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 XAA17706 for ; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 23:01:00 +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 i3GL0vYM020828 for ; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 23:00:58 +0200 Received: from [192.168.1.200] (ppp117-65.lns1.syd2.internode.on.net [150.101.117.65]) by smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i3GL0pZq094408; Sat, 17 Apr 2004 06:30:52 +0930 (CST) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] build tools - good vs. fast, both cheap From: skaller Reply-To: skaller@users.sourceforge.net To: Richard Jones Cc: caml-list In-Reply-To: <20040416193941.GA31885@redhat.com> References: <20040416011616.GA13198@tallman.kefka.frap.net> <20040416160618.GA27238@tallman.kefka.frap.net> <1082139022.20063.136.camel@pelican.wigram> <20040416193941.GA31885@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1082149250.20063.303.camel@pelican.wigram> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-4) Date: 17 Apr 2004 07:00:51 +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 sourceforge:01 2004:99 2004:99 suffices:01 model:01 familiarity:01 dependencies:01 optimised:01 debugging:01 versioning:01 exes:01 9660:01 glebe:01 debug:01 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Sat, 2004-04-17 at 05:39, Richard Jones wrote: > On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 04:10:25AM +1000, skaller wrote: > > I'm against make. It just isn't necessary. Make is for C developers, > > not Ocaml package installation. To build a package it suffices > > to run a sequence of commands in a fixed order. > > Controversial view. Yes, so it seems :D > Why ..? GNU make in particular is a very useful Partly that is because many programming systems follow the C model. Partly because of familiarity. And partly because some of the underlying logic (dependencies etc) is a genuine part of a building concept. > tool for its specialised niche. I use it all the time to build all > lots of things (not just C or OCaml). I'm not saying it isn't useful, rather that it isn't useful enough these days. When I worked at the telco OT with C++ code base of several million LOC, they didn't use make as such. They used a custom general purpose tool called Makeit. It used the same idea, but it also understood some extra things: (1) modules (2) multiple platforms (3) multiple target classes (standard, optimised, debugging) and it could build the lot at once, or not, as you chose. [It also knew about versioning, although I don't think that part ever worked properly] So for example you could have: exes=A,B,C platforms=Solaris,Linux kinds=opt,debug links=static,shlib and it knew enough category theory to 'generate' the product targets internally. -- 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