build in the compiler was Re: version and debug statements

[Ameer Armaly]

"Mike Parker" <aldacron71 at yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:e43e2l$svk$1 at digitaldaemon.com...
> Ameer Armaly wrote:
>
>> But that's exactly my point- a macro processor is independent of 
>> automatic building, so why stuff them together in the same package, 
>> especially since it almost invents a new layered language?  Furthermore, 
>> since building is really nothing mroe than taking advantage of already 
>> present information in the compilation phase, it would be redundant not 
>> to at least consider the idea of combining the two.  By not knowing and 
>> caring, you're essentially putting together a secondary layered compiler 
>> with various features but without any consideration as to whether or not 
>> they actually belong there.
>
> Does it really matter? Having extra functionality in one tool is a 
> convenience I find attractive. I hate having multiple tools in a tool 
> chain. The more functionality Build gives me in one package, the better.
I agree with your philosophy on tool chains, which is exactly why I advocate 
the full-build functionality being in the compiler proper.  As to the macro 
processor and related components, I just don't see any logical grouping for 
them along with project building, thus they should be in their own plugin.