[cfe-dev] alternate clang driver

[Ruben Van Boxem]

2011/10/26 Don Quixote de la Mancha <quixote at dulcineatech.com>

> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Ruben Van Boxem
> <vanboxem.ruben at gmail.com> wrote:
> >. I'm think a BSD-licensed clone/improvement of autotools may have a
> > place as an LLVM subproject if good and useful enough (which would be
> > extremely hard to do), but not in Clang, period.
>
> autotools is great when it works, but it only works if a POSIX shell
> is available, and even then it osten fails quite spectacularly if you
> try to use it on a platform that the original maintainer did not
> anticipate.
>

Agreed. This clone I hypothetically mention that would be useful enough
would throw overboard that shell and anticipation dependency.


> autotools has my vote for the very, very worst Open Source software
> there is.  Whenever I encounter a README or INSTALL FILE that says to
> just do "./configure ; make ; sudo make install" I feel sick.
>

Agreed. It's hell to modify and fix the scripts when something doesn't work
quite right.

ZooLib has never used a command-line driven configuration.  Everything
> it needs is taken care of in a C++ header file.  It has never had any
> problem at all building on platforms like the Classic Mac OS that had
> no shell of any sort.  I've built ZooLib on lots of different
> platforms and never had any trouble with it, while I've had no end of
> trouble with autotools.
>
>   http://www.zoolib.org/
>
> It is Open Source under the MIT License.
>

Cool, that's how I think as well, and that's pretty much how Boost works
(apart from its build tool itself). WebKit does the same. Most configury
checks are superfluous anyway on the most common platforms people write
their code for. This is getting off-topic though, so I'm going to shut up
now :)

Ruben
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20111026/f03ff175/attachment.html>