[erlang-questions] Use of makefiles

[Bengt Kleberg]

Greetings,

It was not the intention of James Hague that everyone should rewrite
make in perl (if it was I would appreciate if he corrected me). Firstly
that is already done (Cons). Secondly when he wrote "I can bang out a
Perl program that does the same thing", he meant a perl program
replacing not make, but the makefile.

The question I asked was if a perl program would be more likely to run
on ''any'' machine, than a makefile. Not because the person who wrote
the makefile forgot/failed to read the manual for gnu make, but because
there are other make programs than gnu make out there. The 4 ones I have
used where not compatible. They would not run each others makefiles.

I have heard that there is only one perl, so it should be compatible.
So, is the chance of finding perl on ''any'' computer bigger than the
chance of finding the right make program for your makefile?


bengt

.On Tue, 2008-03-04 at 13:09 -0500, Toby Thain wrote:
> On 4-Mar-08, at 11:57 AM, Bengt Kleberg wrote:
> 
> > Greetings,
> >
> > Is it not also the case that perl is more standard than make?
> 
> 
> Is *everyone* supposed to rewrite make in Perl every time they want  
> to build something?
> 
> > I know very little of perl, but have fought at least 4 different kinds
> > of make (files).
> 
> The GNU make documentation is really very good. I don't know why  
> people rarely refer to it.
> 
> --T
> 
> >
> >
> > bengt
> >
> > On Tue, 2008-03-04 at 10:11 -0600, James Hague wrote:
> >> On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 8:41 PM, Steve Vinoski <vinoski@REDACTED>  
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>  Hi Joe, I agree with you 100%. Give me emacs (with its vast  
> >>> emacs-lisp
> >>>  extensibility), bash (or ksh), and various UNIX command-line tools,
> >>>  which I can combine as I wish using pipes, and keep the visual  
> >>> tools
> >>>  out of my way (and out of my RAM).
> >>
> >> I think this discussion has been misinterpreted :)  No one is arguing
> >> for IDE-like features over makefiles.
> >>
> >> I have found that I don't need makefiles for my Erlang projects.  I
> >> either recompile the same module repeatedly or I want to rebuild
> >> everything.  The former is business as usual.  The latter is easily
> >> done with a shell script, Perl script, or short Erlang program.  I  
> >> use
> >> makefiles infrequently enough that I always forget the syntax and
> >> nuances of using them.  But I can bang out a Perl program that does
> >> the same thing--even checking file modification dates and so on--in
> >> very little time.  It's more flexible than using a makefile, too, and
> >> usually ends up being less "code."
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> erlang-questions mailing list
> >> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> >> http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > erlang-questions mailing list
> > erlang-questions@REDACTED
> > http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
> 
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions