[Module::Build] [Fwd: Re: [PATCH] MakeMaker, XS and C++]
Status: Beta
Brought to you by:
kwilliams
|
From: Randy W. S. <Ra...@Th...> - 2003-11-28 22:49:46
|
Forwarded from perl5-porters. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [PATCH] MakeMaker, XS and C++ Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 02:04:56 -0800 (PST) From: Salvador "Fandiño" <sfa...@ya...> To: Michael G Schwern <sc...@po...> CC: per...@pe..., Nick Ing-Simmons <nic...@el...>, mak...@pe... --- Michael G Schwern <sc...@po...> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 26, 2003 at 07:40:57PM +0000, Salvador Fandiño wrote: > > A new version of the "C++ support for MakeMaker" patch is ready. > > The more I think about this the more nervous I get at putting all > this new functionality into MakeMaker in a part that's not very > well understood > (XS module building) while I'm trying to wind down development. > > Sorry to ask this so late in the process, but is there a good > reason this couldn't be done with Module::Build instead? > And "because lots of people use MakeMaker" isn't one of them. well, Module::Build biggest strength is that it´s a pure Perl module that doesn't depend on an external tool like make but for C/C++ modules you will need a development environment anyway and using make is not a problem at all. Actually, most C/C++ developers should feel more comfortable using and customizing ExtUtils::MakeMaker/make than Module::Build and not because EU::MM has been there forever and M::B is new but because they can look at the generated Makefile and understand it. For example, I have a SWIG based module that builds with EU::MM and that has a simple make rule to generate the .c file from a .i SWIG file. Could I have done the same which M::B easily? I doubt it, I would have to understand M::B internals, for EU::MM I only need to know how to add a rule to the generated Makefile. Bye, - Salva. |