Re: Request for comments: CONS specification

[H. S. Teoh]

On Sun, May 30, 2004 at 09:22:36PM +0200, Søren Mou Jakobsen wrote:
[snip]
> In a previous mail the problem of not knowing the exact dependencies in a
> build tree was discussed in relation to building TeX documents. I’ve had
> major problems with this particular problem. I work at a company which
> created application for interactive television. The build process is usually
> very complicated and can contain up to ten build steps from sources to final
> target. We generate a lot of C code and headers during the build process.
> Those files can’t be dependency scanned when a project is built from
> scratch. Also when a project is built the second time the dependency scan is
> sometimes wrong because the previous versions of C and header files are
> scanned.

Yes, I use this method (albeit not as complex) a lot in my own projects.
So right now, unless somebody comes up with a better solution, I'm very
much inclined to have build-time dependency scanning in Cons.

[snip]
> As a proof of concept for qs I made also made some node and edges classes
> which provides a back wards compatibility with cons. This means that good
> old construct files were parsed and a dependency graph was build up using
> the qs interface. It might be interesting to complete this so that the new
> cons is actually contains an export builder which gives back wards
> compatibility with old project. This could ease the transition from old cons
> to new cons.
[snip]

Although I'd rather worry about finishing the new core first, I agree that
we should provide a backward-compatible interface so that existing Cons
projects don't have to rewrite everything just to upgrade to the new Cons.


T

-- 
Some days you win; most days you lose.