build system

Eric Poggel (JoeCoder) dnewsgroup2 at yage3d.net
Wed Oct 26 11:55:51 PDT 2011


On 10/26/2011 2:51 PM, Eric Poggel (JoeCoder) wrote:
> On 10/26/2011 2:30 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>> I think the best approach would be to have a complete language for the
>> build scripts.
>
> This is the approach I've taken with dsource.org/projects/cdc. That
> language is D. It provides a library of common compilation tasks and
> then you fill in the main() with what you want it to do. Then you can
> simply invoke dmd -run buildscript.d to create your project.
>
> At one point it worked with d1 and d2 with ldc, gdc, and dmd, phobos or
> tango. But it's been a year or so since I've tested.
>
> It can also be used as a pass-through tool to dmd, gdc, or ldc, except
> it accepts source paths as well as source files (adding all files in the
> path to the build). But rdmd may already do this better, since cdc
> currently lacks any concept of an incremental build.


But my point here isn't so much to promote CDC, bur rather to insist 
that we should use D instead of a custom language invented for the task. 
  Reasons:

1.  D will always be more powerful.  And you will have all of phobos at 
your disposal.  You can parse xml, ftp files, etc.
2.  Anyone writing this script will already know D.  They won't have to 
learn another language.
3.  We'll truly be eating our own dog food.  Although I wouldn't call it 
dog food.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list