Rebuild 0.3 released

[Gregor Richards]

Bill Baxter wrote:
> Gregor Richards wrote:
>> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>> Gregor Richards wrote:
>>>
>>>> Fixed some bugs introduced in rebuild 0.2, and also fixed support 
>>>> for 'version=' statements.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.dsource.org/projects/dsss/wiki/Rebuild
>>>>
>>>>  - Gregor Richards
>>>
>>>
>>> Two questions:
>>>
>>> Does rebuild support environment variables in a build file?  Like
>>>    -I$(DMDDIR)/dmd/import
>>>
>>> Is there some way to read commands from build files other than the 
>>> '@file' syntax?  Like '-f filename' for example.
>>>
>>> --bb
>>
>> Rebuild does not, at present, support response files. I don't find 
>> them particularly useful, since simply making a .bat or .sh and 
>> putting 'rebuild' at the beginning suffices for a more powerful method 
>> with negligible learning curve.
> 
> Ok I guess I misunderstood the help message then.  What does this mean?
> 
> f:\>rebuild
> ReBuild version 0.2 (based on DMD 1.005)
> Copyright (c) 1999-2007 by Digital Mars and Gregor Richards, written by 
> Walter Bright and Gregor Richards
> Documentation: www.digitalmars.com/d/index.html
> Usage:
>   rebuild files.d ... { -switch }
>   files.d        D source files
>   @cmdfile       read arguments from cmdfile
>   ...
> 
> specifically the "@cmdfile" part.

Bloody ... wtf ... mars.c is a bit weird:

printf("\
Documentation: www.digitalmars.com/d/index.html\n\
Usage:\n\
   rebuild files.d ... { -switch }\n\
\n\
   files.d        D source files\n%s\
...
",
#if WIN32
"  @cmdfile       read arguments from cmdfile\n"
#else
""
#endif
);

That "#if WIN32" should be "#if __DMC__", since it later reads the 
response file with a DMC-specific feature.

That shouldn't be there, and indeed isn't there on Posix X_X

> 
>> I suppose if there is demand, I will add support. My personal distaste 
>> for them shouldn't be the be-all end-all.
> 
> Well the problem with making a .bat or .sh is that it is platform 
> specific.  I don't care if it's a 'response file' or just some 
> configuration file in some other format that looks different from 
> command line options. But I do find the ability to put a build config in 
> a file to be very useful.  And I do find the @file syntax, where some 
> particular suffix is implied, to be kind of annoying, because tab 
> completion in most any shell completes whole filenames not partial ones. 
>  That's why I'd prefer a "-f filename" syntax.  *With* the space in 
> between -f and filename if possible.
> 
> --bb

I'll add a flag. It probably won't be -f, that's just a bit too generic 
for my taste ;)

  - Gregor Richards