[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: [ANN] Bou - a Lua-based Build System
- From: "steve donovan" <steve.j.donovan@...>
- Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 12:47:25 +0200
Well, it would be straightforward to wrap up Bou as a standalone
(there's more than one way to skin that cat ;)). And it would still be
less than 150K
My concern is that it is collecting more and more special rules in an
attempt to capture all those tool pecularities we know and love. But
perhaps that's what's needed. It is certainly possible to put special
rules into special modules, very straightforward to handle new cases
as they occur. It's just that I'm undecided whether they should end up
in one big monolithic file. 1200 lines feels ok, but 2000? (Speed is
not the issue here - it would be just as fast)
I start to see the point of makefile generators; regard Make as the
universal build-rule-assembler. But that ain't true for many Windoze
Good to have a common repository of Lua build knowledge in a system;
the trouble is that people will put LuaBinaries _anywhere_ in Windows!
But you can easily deduce (a) the name of the Lua binary (it's in
arg[-1]) and (b) the current package path/cpath. If only there wasn't
this problem with how to spell 'lua51' !
I like having a tool which can switch between a gcc and cl build with
a single command-line switch.
On Feb 8, 2008 12:33 PM, Miles Bader <email@example.com> wrote:
> Duck <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Also, Bou plugs into an existing Lua installation; Prime Mover does not
> > (it carries around its own Lua sources and compiles them as needed).
> Pm's technique is an interesting way to get around the "nobody has the
> necessary prerequisites installed" problem that tends to be a issue for
> alternative build systems.... [e.g., "ant", which I guess needs tens of
> megabytes of crap installed before it will do anything...]
> Optimist, n. A proponent of the doctrine that black is white.