Re: Problem with dependancies

[Johan Holmberg]

On Thu, 4 Apr 2002 address@hidden wrote:
>
> So I ask the following question, ( I am no Cons/perl expert so
> bear with me) was Cons::Plus implemented in a way incompatible
> with the Cons architecture? Is this the reason why those features
> are not part of Cons? Is Cons::Plus a proper extension of Cons or
> not?
>

When I developed Cons::Plus my intention was that it should be
possible to use Cons::Plus-environments as a "plug-in" replacement
for Cons-environments. If you use a Cons::Plus-environment
as if it was a Cons-environment, it should work exactly as a
Cons-environment. (The only difference would be better default
values for PATH, especially on Windows).

I even executed the testsuite that comes with Cons, but replaced
each Cons-environent by a Cons::Plus-environment (by  tweaking the
source code in "cons.pl"). Cons::Plus then passed the test-suite
(apart from some uninteresteing cases where the testcases assumed
that the exact Perl class of the objects were "cons").

I haven't been re-running these testcases for every new version of
Cons::Plus (I have been to lazy ...), but in principle it could be
done.

Once you start to  use the features of Cons::Plus, you get different
behaviour (thats the whole point of the module :-)). But I hope that
Cons::Plus stays reasonably well in the "spirit" of Cons.

One of they ways Cons::Plus differs significantly from Cons is the
method it encourages for achieving variant builds. Instead of
"Link" Cons::Plus has it's own way of doing this (or three ways as
Rajesh pointed out). But that is one of the main features of
Cons::Plus (ie. having a replacement for "Link").

/Johan Holmberg