ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <davidjen...@earthlink.net>
Subject Re: Need Ammo in Make vs. Ant argument...
Date Sat, 09 Jun 2001 05:10:13 GMT
Hi,
On 2001.06.09 00:49:46 -0400 Diane Holt wrote:
> --- David Jencks <davidjencks@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > I've seen frequently "ant is no good for c++", and I wonder why.  I had
> > no trouble writing a (linux/gcc) c++ compilation for an admittedly not
> > enormous (about 80-90 files) project using apply for cpp > o and execon
> > for linking. It doesn't have the extensive lists of dependencies
> > sometimes found in make files, but then javac doesn't have that kind of
> > dependency checking either.  So just why is make better?
> 
> How did you deal with header-file changes?

Aha, now I'm learning. I didn't. (this was to replace a make file on a
project that has experienced few changes, which is probably why I didn't
realize this problem).  Are there other problems?

david jencks
> 
> Diane
> 
> 
> =====
> (holtdl@yahoo.com)
> 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 
> a year!  http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
> 


Mime
View raw message