Have Win DMD use gmake instead of a separate DMMake makefile?

[Nick Sabalausky]

On Sat, 10 Aug 2013 16:21:45 -0700
Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg at gmx.com> wrote:
> 
> Another suggestion that I kind of liked was to just build them all
> with a single script written in D and ditch make entirely, which
> would seriously reduce the amount of duplication across platforms.
> But that's obviously a much bigger change and would likely be much
> more controversial than simply using a more standard make.
> 

Yea, while I do like that too, it would make bootstrapping difficult.

But then again, if parts of DMD start being written in D (as there has
been some talk about), then that would have to deal with the exact same
bootstrapping issue anyway.

Although, if that does happen (parts of DMD written in D), then I'd
imagine it may help a lot to do it *starting* from a really good solid
makefile instead of the inconsistent makefiles we have now. *Then* we
could transition to a D-based buildscript if we really wanted, but I
think starting with a D-based buildscript, or the current posix/win
makefiles, could just make everything messier.

The posix makefiles actually aren't too bad at this point (the
"generated" directories phobos/druntime use on posix are a big
improvement) but the windows makefiles seem to be lagging behind. At
the very least, I'd like to see that situation engineered away via
common posix/windows makefiles - which of course requires using the
same "make".