Home > Archive > Tcl > December 2004 > bjam and tcl
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| sheila miguez 2004-12-22, 4:05 pm |
| Does anyone have experiences to share regarding the use of bjam for
complicated tcl projects? I'm rethinking our build process and pondering
make vs all of the make alternatives. Jam (or Boost.jam) seems to be the
healthiest alternative to make; however, it looks like one would need to
script up some jam code to handle tcl builds. I was wondering if someone
has already created jam files for tcl projects.
--
sheila
| |
| Arjen Markus 2004-12-23, 9:04 am |
| sheila miguez wrote:
>
> Does anyone have experiences to share regarding the use of bjam for
> complicated tcl projects? I'm rethinking our build process and pondering
> make vs all of the make alternatives. Jam (or Boost.jam) seems to be the
> healthiest alternative to make; however, it looks like one would need to
> script up some jam code to handle tcl builds. I was wondering if someone
> has already created jam files for tcl projects.
>
> --
> sheila
You have also considered bras? (I do not know anything about bjam, nor
your particular Tcl projects, but bras seems quite capable of handling
complicated builds ...)
Information on bras: http://wiki.tcl.tk/5975
Regards,
Arjen
| |
| sheila miguez 2004-12-23, 9:04 am |
| On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 09:39:39 +0100, Arjen Markus wrote:
> sheila miguez wrote:
[color=darkred]
> You have also considered bras? (I do not know anything about bjam, nor
> your particular Tcl projects, but bras seems quite capable of handling
> complicated builds ...)
>
> Information on bras: http://wiki.tcl.tk/5975
Thanks. I've checked the wiki page on alternatives to make, and looked
at bras. I didn't think it was still active because the change log on
the web site lists the last release in 2002.
I need to build multiple tcl projects in addition to multiple c++
projects all rooted in different repositories, and I currently work with a
bat file doing this with a sledgehammer approach.
--
sheila
| |
| Arjen Markus 2004-12-23, 4:08 pm |
| sheila miguez wrote:
>
> On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 09:39:39 +0100, Arjen Markus wrote:
>
>
> Thanks. I've checked the wiki page on alternatives to make, and looked
> at bras. I didn't think it was still active because the change log on
> the web site lists the last release in 2002.
>
> I need to build multiple tcl projects in addition to multiple c++
> projects all rooted in different repositories, and I currently work with a
> bat file doing this with a sledgehammer approach.
>
I suggest you give it a try: it has many possibilities to define the
rules for deciding when to compile and link. All the tools for C and C++
ought to be there (alas, none for Fortran, for which I would like to use
it and some compilers I suffer from require a host of options to work
properly; I ought to take that hurdle some day soon - it may be just
"cold-water fear" because I do have bits and pieces a-working).
Regards,
Arjen
| |
| Cameron Laird 2004-12-26, 8:55 am |
| In article <slrncslf4m.12u.she@ftupet.com>,
sheila miguez <she@nospam.pobox.com.invalid> wrote:
| |
| Arjen Markus 2004-12-28, 9:12 am |
| Cameron Laird wrote:
>
> b. .BAT and make are rather horrible, at
> least in comparison to the maintenance
> tools we developers deserve to have.
Defining these tools seems to be non-trivial, given
all the initiatives to create alternatives to "make"!
(I wish there was an off-the-shelf replacement for
"make" - bras may come close, but, like I said before, it
lacks a few things that I need ... and that may be the
reason for the plethora of make-like utilities ...)
Regards,
Arjen
|
|
|
|
|