This is the mail archive of the
guile@cygnus.com
mailing list for the Guile project.
Re: Tired of make. Anyone interested in a guile-based replacement?
Klaus Schilling <Klaus.Schilling@home.ivm.de> writes:
> > > I think it would be good to replace
> > >
> > > autoconf
>
> So there's no need for guile to read m4 in order to replace it in
> autoconf?
Right. I should have added m4 and perl to the list for clarity.
[Also, I'd like to add that I think the authors of automake, automake
and libtool has done an amazing work, and solved really important
problems. Obviously, the idea of a "super make" wasn't the right
thing to do at the time these authors started their work. But due to
this work we know a lot more about what problems need to be solved.]
And note that I'm not talking about "replacing" one or two of these
tools, but approaching the entire problem anew.
E.g., instead of letting configure invoke ltconfig to produce a script
which make uses sh to run in order to obtain the command line to use
when compiling, the new tool (let's call it "build") would compute the
command line itself, using a data base of linking conventions.
The only tool required to build a package ought to be `build' +
compiler, even when building new versions of `build' itself.
(One could include a "bootstrapping" package in order to facilitate
porting to new architectures.)
(I really ought to shut up before reading the rest of this thread.
I probably repeat what others have said already.)