Examples of dub use needed

[Mike Parker via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 23 June 2016 at 13:33:03 UTC, Wyatt wrote:

> Yes, this is a good idea.  It took me most of a day of trying 
> to wrestle my project into a dub-compatible state and I 
> honestly ended up giving up because my old Makefile is shorter, 
> faster, and much easier to understand. (IIRC, the last straw 
> was realising dub doesn't seem to have a good answer to Make 
> targets, so building my library test samples was... impossible?
>  Or at least completely obtuse.)

Makefiles that are easier to understand? Ugh. I hate Makefiles 
with a passion. For me, DUB is so much more intuitive. Testing a 
library as you develop it is straightforward. I'll certainly 
cover that. I'm not sure what you mean about the make targets, 
though. DUB does have configurations, which are approximately the 
same thing.

>
> I would request that you especially look for common build 
> idioms and how to represent them in dub, because I'm apparently 
> not the only one who thinks it's not obvious.
>

Sure, I'll do what I can.