Re: [Chicken-hackers] Re: separate build directory support for Chicken

[Elf]

we could just dispense with make altogether and set the ordering manually...
it shouldnt need to change all that frequently.

then its just a matter of defining a small number of variables for the 
differences between platforms (cygwin needing lots of extra flags, for 
example, when doing shared lined), and portable shellscripts/batch files
that can check timestamps.


re: build system preferences, i am a fan of a single config setting file 
with options grouped together and mostly commented out, as in:

## Some option that does something or another
#
## Uncomment the following line if building for linux:
# OPTION_VALUE=linuxsetting
## Uncomment the following line if building for macos:
# OPTION_VALUE=macossetting
## Uncomment the following line if building for mingw:
# OPTION_VALUE=mingwsetting

etc.  its easy to see what to do and where, reduces needless duplication,
and is easily maintainable.

for cross compilation issues, simply have BOOTSTRAP_<blah> settings as well
as regular settings, when applicable.



-elf

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Ivan Shmakov wrote:

> > > > > > Ivan Shmakov <address@hidden> writes:
> > > > > > felix winkelmann <address@hidden> writes:
>
> [...]
>
> >>> Actually, I'm planning a build system rewrite which, by utilising
> >>> some of the GNU Make features, will make the build system /much
> >>> more/ manageable.  I've already reduced rules.make down to 38 KiB
> >>> (i. e., by 40%) and it doesn't look that I'm going to stop just
> >>> yet.
>
> >> Reducing size isn't everything. I'd rather have simple makefiles
> >> than complex ones, even if their bigger.
>
> > My point is that the code duplication increases complexity.
>
>         And, well, I have some trouble understanding the manageability
>         or even readability of the Makefile fragments like the
>         following:
>
> --cut--
> FOO-1$(O): FOO-1.c
>         COMPILE-IT
> FOO-2$(O): FOO-2.c
>         COMPILE-IT
> [ ... 74 lines skipped... ]
> FOO-40$(O): FOO-40.c
>         COMPILE-IT
> --cut--
>
>         Rather, I'd have:
>
> --cut--
> FOO_SOURCES = FOO-1.c FOO-2.c ... FOO-40.c
> FOO_OBJECTS = $(FOO_SOURCES:.c=$(O))
>
> $(FOO_OBJECTS) : %$(O) : %.c
>         COMPILE-IT
> --cut--
>
>         Would there be more dependencies for FOO-N objects, I'd add them
>         as follows:
>
> $(FOO_OBJECTS)          : GENERIC-FOO-DEPENDENCIES
> FOO-X$(O) FOO-Y$(O)     : SPECIFIC-FOO-X-Y-DEPENDENCIES
> FOO-Z$(O)               : SPECIFIC-FOO-Z-DEPENDENCIES
>
>         Furthermore, I'd suggest using the C compiler to compute
>         dependencies, and not to hardcode them in the makefile.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chicken-hackers mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers