[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Request for comments: CONS specification
From: |
Pierre THIERRY |
Subject: |
Re: Request for comments: CONS specification |
Date: |
Tue, 1 Jun 2004 01:43:51 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i |
> I really have the feeling you reinvent the wheel, and your analysis
> misses one fundamental point : what is missing in other
> implementations that you will bring with a new cons?
I don't know other implementations precisely enough to tell it some of
my ideas are missing, in todo lists or so. But I don't think any build
tool provide a guessing system as complete as the one we are planning to
have.
The two others tools I consider really complete out there are SCons and
AAP. Boht are written in Python. Python has great advantages, but I
really dislike it. Because I have been using it intensively for some
time, I'm being better and better at Perl, and like it very much.
I think it's the main point why I would work on Cons instead of going
into another valuable existing project.
Specifically,
le Moine Fou
--
address@hidden
OpenPGP 0xD9D50D8A
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
- Re: Request for comments: CONS specification, (continued)
Re: Request for comments: CONS specification, Pierre THIERRY, 2004/05/27
RE: Request for comments: CONS specification, Søren Mou Jakobsen, 2004/05/30
Re: Request for comments: CONS specification, H. S. Teoh, 2004/05/31