 |
lua-l archive |
|
|
||
|
SCons fixes the problem that makefiles are not really a programming language.
Often, you need to do some kind of on-the-fly analysis while doing a build. While makefiles offer limited conditional capabilities, that falls short in many cases.
For me, personally, SCons fixes the problem that I don't want .o's thrown around in the source directories. I hate it, and it makes multiplatform builds practically not an option.
With SCons (or: Hamster in this case) I have temp/darwin, temp/win32.gcc, temp/win32.msc, you get the picture.. and _all_ temporary object files live within these. I can even run several compiles parallel, without them effecting each other.
Third... (not convinced, yet? ;P ) SCons does dependency check much more clever than make does. Make uses timestamps, period. SCons finds header changes and, most importantly, recompiles if the compilation parameters (command line) has changed. This is immensely important, since it practically avoids doing 'make clean'.
That said, if you just need to change a link flag, makefiles may be the better choice. :)
My opinions are of course only my personal ones. Oh, and btw, adding a link flag in scons is done by "LINKFLAGS='-whatever'" :)
-ak p.s.Also, makefiles are not that platform independent. As an example, BSD make (even gnu make) does not provide the same conditionals as the other platforms do (please correct me if I'm wrong).
26.3.2004 kello 04:08, Johann Hibschman kirjoitti:
It's unclear to me what the problem is that SCons fixes.