RE: Some questions for Cons

[Cai_Lixin]

I really appriciate your reply about my questions. I think Anthony Kolarik's
reply reminds me that I should ask another question: 

Since for our products, we only support on Win4.0. So I would like to know
whether Cons works pretty good on Win4.0. I am a perl user, and I have
experiences on coding perl on both Unix and Win32. It looks like perl works
better on Unix than on NT. We used to create a function using perl on Unix,
but can not realize it on Win32. We have to use C++ to realize this
function. Perl on Win32 is better now, since more and more people are
developing more modules. 

I would like to know whether Cons meet the same problem as perl has?

Thanks a lot!

Lixin
-----Original Message-----
From: Anthony Kolarik [mailto:address@hidden
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 11:27 AM
To: address@hidden
Subject: RE: Some questions for Cons


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Timothee Besset [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 9:21 AM
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: Some questions for Cons
> 
> 
> cons (at least the current 2.3.1 version from cvs) is feature complete
> (except for parallel builds), and doesn't have any known bugs 
> (right?). I
> am using it on my own projects because in it's current state 
> it fits me
> well. 
> However, it doesn't seem to get some developement effort anymore. This
> mailing list has been fairly quiet. 

I attribute the low volume of this list to there not being much that people
need or want that's not already available in a pretty stable form.
Although, a few more newbie questions might be a good sign ;-)

> If I were to start a new project now,
> I would probably have a look at scons, which tries to get to be cons
> successor. Using the same concepts, but written in python:
> 
> http://scons.sourceforge.net/
> 

I think two aspects of cons put off some new users and if scons fixed either
or both it could benefit. 

One is the doc, which is a bit obscure due to it's
"anti-make/tutorial/reference manual" format, and a few years of ad hoc
changes and additions.  I assume cons doc is a low priority for people on
the list who've muddled through it already or who are fluent in perl.  But
IMHO cons usage would really benefit from a total re-write of the doc, _and_
a few working sample build trees right in the tarball.

The other weakness for a fair number of potential users is the (relative
lack of) win32 support.  There are a couple of good cons extensions to make
up for this.  Having something that's supported and available right out of
the box might help give cons more of the user base it deserves. 
 -- Tony K.

> However it seems that scons is still an Alpha version and 
> probably not fit
> for production use at this point.
> 
> TTimo
> 
> On Thu, 14 Feb 2002 09:08:57 -0500
> address@hidden wrote:
> 
> > Dear all,
> > 
> > We are thinking using Cons to replace clearmake. But we are 
> considering the
> > following things:
> > 
> > 1. Whether Cons is a very popular make function in the 
> market? (That means
> > whether more and more people begin to use Cons instead of make)?
> > 
> > 2. Whether development of Cons is still continuing? Or it 
> is going to die?
> > 
> > If you are using Cons now, can you give me some comments or 
> suggestions?
> > 
> > Since this is part of my project, I need to know these 
> infomation to make
> > decision.
> > 
> > I really appriciate if you can give me some info about Cons.
> > 
> > Thanks in advance!
> > 
> > Lixin
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > address@hidden
> > http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/cons-discuss
> > Cons URL: http://www.dsmit.com/cons/
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/cons-discuss
> Cons URL: http://www.dsmit.com/cons/
> 

_______________________________________________
address@hidden
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/cons-discuss
Cons URL: http://www.dsmit.com/cons/