home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   comp.lang.c++.moderated      Moderated discussion of C++ superhackery      33,346 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 31,845 of 33,346   
   Thomas Richter to Miles Bader   
   Re: What will keep C++ going, given that   
   25 Jan 12 11:19:33   
   
   From: thor@math.tu-berlin.de   
      
   On 24.01.2012 02:44, Miles Bader wrote:   
   > Mathias Gaunard  writes:   
   >> On Jan 21, 3:23 pm, Roman W  wrote:   
   >>> Whereas whenever I need to write/modify a Makefile, I need to google   
   >>> for the manual of the syntax, because the patterns and   
   >>> pre-defined variables are cryptic to me.   
   >>   
   >> Few people still write Makefiles by hand in this day and age.   
   >> Most people use autotools, jam, CMake, SCons or lesser-known build   
   >> systems. (the last two can generate Visual Studio project and solution   
   >> files)   
   >   
   > I'm not sure that changes the point -- those are all fine systems   
   > (though far from perfect), but none could exactly be called   
   > "intuitive" for somebody that that doesn't use them regularly.   
      
   Certainly not. I personally wouldn't call C++ "intuitive" either, but   
   powerful. (-: It's the same with such tools: There are also very   
   powerful, and with power comes complexity. The point is just that they   
   are, in my experience, much more powerful than a relatively simple build   
   process I can trigger from an IDE, and they can integrate many   
   more steps in software development than a GUI could. That *includes*   
   building autodocs, manuals from TeX, building distributions of code etc.   
      
   With a GUI, I would need to remember all those steps, and need to "push   
   the mouse". It's much easier to type "make distrib" once, and have all   
   the steps done with many more programs involved than just compiler and   
   linker. Clearly, it is harder to setup, but it is then much more   
   convenient once you have done that.   
      
   Besides, you typically write makefiles once - and then only update them.   
   (-: Over projects, I mean.   
      
   I personally found automake too much handicapped to be of much use, but   
   autoconf does definitely has its merits when you need to build for more   
   than one platform. VS just works on one.   
      
   Greetings,   
   	Thomas   
      
      
      
      
      
   --   
         [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]   
         [ comp.lang.c++.moderated.    First time posters: Do this! ]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca