Re: Hmmm.... future of cons?

[Dominique Dumont]

Gary Oberbrunner <address@hidden> writes:

> address@hidden wrote:
> 
> > This brings up the question of what "moving on" means for those currently
> > using Cons.  Is/will there some way to move from Cons to SCons/Python?
> > Other than rewriting all Construct and Conscript files by hand I mean.
> 
> 
> For us at least, there's far more "plain perl" in our Construct/Conscript
> files than there are calls to cons methods.  I have about 3400 lines of
> Cons-related stuff, of which about 200-300 lines (a guess) are actual Cons
> calls, and the rest are perl.  So unless the migration tool could convert
> arbitrary perl code to python, it wouldn't help all that much.

On our side, we spent a lot of time to move to Cons. The conscript
and construct use quite a lot of perl instruction and a lot of
tinkering with Cons variable.

I'd hate to explain my boss that we should repeat this effort for Scons.

Cheers

-- 
address@hidden