.bat file to help compile easier - dmd/build

[Tim M]

On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 01:40:03 +1300, John Reimer <terminal.node at gmail.com>  
wrote:

> Hello Don,
>
>> Tim M wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 08:17:17 +1300, Michael P.
>>> <baseball.mjp at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Okay, so right now, I'm making a small game(Mario) using DAllegro. I
>>>> use build, and every time, I have to type this in to compile my
>>>> progress:
>>>>  build mario alleg.lib
>>>>  Now, I know it's not a lot of typing. But considering I type mario
>>>> wrong every so often, and I generally want to execute it after,
>>>> assuming there is not compiler errors, it takes time.
>>>> In a .bat file right now, I have this:
>>>> build mario alleg.lib
>>>> mario
>>>> But, mario will execute even if there are errors found by dmd.
>>>> Is there anything that I can use to see if errors were found, and if
>>>> there isn't, execute it, and if there is, don't execute it?
>>>> DMD1.036, Windows XP, Build/Bud 3.04
>>> I thought everyone used dsss with d now.
>>> http://dsource.org/projects/dsss.
>>>
>> No way! On Windows, bud is much better. dsss can't build dlls, for
>> example, which is a blocker for me. It also seems to be based around
>> the flawed concept that you have a small number of build
>> configurations.
>>
>
>
> Yes, I think bud is still quite good on windows (and faster than dsss),  
> even though I don't use it.  But there's no replacing dsss on linux at  
> the moment. It's nice to have the cross-platform option of dsss on win32  
> too.
>
> That said, if bud worked (easily) on linux, I might actually go back to  
> using it again, since dsss doesn't seem to be going anywhere and recent  
> releases have been getting slower and bulkier (possibly due to the  
> combined effect of recent dmd releases). :-(
>
> -JJR
>
>

Could you both explain a bit more about this as dsss says it is based on  
rebuild and rebuild is based on bud. So I though that dsss > rebuild > bud.