Re: Regarding "make"-systems [Was: Re: [dev] Build system: redo]

From: Uriel <>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 02:23:12 +0200

On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Ciprian Dorin Craciun
<> wrote:
> (I've changed the subject of the thread because I want to move the
> discussion in a more "general" direction not specific to one build
> system.)
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 7:53 PM, Anselm R Garbe <> wrote:
>> The holy make replacement is already there:
> Starting from a minor side note about `mk` (at least the
> `plan9port` version, but I doubt the one from `9base` doesn't suffer
> the same problems): it doesn't cope nicely with large, especially
> generated, make files (i.e. after a few hundred rules)... (But when
> you want to use them as a "backend" for another generator (like for
> example `CMake` ore any other "suckless" or "bloatfull" system), you
> get in a heap of problems... See the thread below for a lengthy
> discussion...)

If you have generated makefiles with hundreds of rules, or cmake, or
auto*hell, you already lost. Please stop writing code, become a lawyer
or a bureaucrat.

This whole topic is so silly, just use a language that doesn't need
any of this nonsense, like Go.

Received on Mon Aug 13 2012 - 02:23:12 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Aug 13 2012 - 02:24:06 CEST