"-inline" is bad!

[Jason House]

Bruce Adams Wrote:
> The trouble with proper build utilities is that they are often too specific. This is why I an inevitably drawn back to make, even if I allow it to palm some of the work off onto other utilities. For example, will dsss build my doxygen documentation for me, run my integration tests (hopefully it does the unit tests) and format my coverage report the way I like it.  Nor would I expect it to. Make is horrible and should be replaced but none of the many general purpose replacements seem to have really taken off. Its a bit like democracy. Obviously flawed but there doesn't seem to be anything better.
> Still it would be interesting to do a quick survey of what people are using for D as well for their non-D (heresy!) stuff.

I use gnu make.  It may be redundant for specifying how to build files, but I've found it to be more flexible for handling whatever crazy stuff I decide to do.  I've had gnu build doxygen documentation, run regression tests, and collect results into a draft report.  I've never had a problem that I've tried to solve with gnu make that I wasn't able to figure out how to do it.  The only limitation I've ever found is that I can't specify rules with multiple wildcards in build rules