From: Curt Hibbs <curt@...>
Date: 2001-12-20T03:17:35+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:28973] Re: Ruby 'make' replacement (Re: stderr from external process?)

Why not do a Ruby implementation of ANT (http://jakarta.apache.org/ant/)?
Beside being an emerging open standard that uses XML, the specification is
already in place, and you could jumpstart the implementation by porting the
Java implementation to Ruby.

In any case, something like this would be welcome add-in to the FreeRIDE
(Ruby IDE) project. See http://www.rubygarden.org/ruby?FreeRIDE.

Curt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christian Boos [mailto:cboos@bct-technology.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 8:57 AM
> To: ruby-talk ML
> Subject: [ruby-talk:28960] RE: Ruby 'make' replacement (Re: stderr from
> external process?)
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I am planning to work on a 'make' replacement tool (written in Ruby of
> course)
> in the following weeks. Not much work done yet. I just wanted to see
> if there is some interest/existing work in the community on this subject.
>
> My idea is to describe targets as instances of some classes that have
> to logic to build themselves appropriately ("CppLib" class,
> "Jar" class, whatever ...)
> Those objects need to be related together with dependency links.
> Some "vaporware" code to illustrate this:
>
> ---- project.rb ----
> class Project < Makefile
>
>     Lib = CppLib.new
>     Lib.add_source_files %w{ a.cpp b.cpp util.cpp }
>
>     Exe = CppExe.new
>     Exe.add_source_file "main.cpp"
>     Exe.add_library Lib
>
> end
> -------------------
>
> Just a start :)
>
> -- Christian
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: MikkelFJ [mailto:mikkelj-anti-spam@post1.dknet.dk]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 3:51 PM
> To: ruby-talk ML; undisclosed-recipients: ;
> Subject: [ruby-talk:28923] Re: stderr from external process?
>
> ...
> > Longer term: I really hate the build tools around. "Ant" is an
> attempt to
> > make something better in Java.
>
> Phil suggests: "Jam".
>
> ...
>
> Therefore, I'm currently all for going with Boost.Build.'s version of Jam.
> Still I wonder if Ruby wouldn't be a better language for the job?
>
>
>