Guido van Rossum writes: > To me this seems like a big waste of time. > I see nothing broken with the current setup. I've built Python on every kind of system we have at FNAL, which means Linux, several versions of Solaris, IRIX, DEC^H^H^HCompaq OSF/1, even (shudder) WinNT, and the only complaint I've ever had with the build system is that it doesn't do a "make depend" automatically. (I don't care too much about the dependencies on system headers, but the Makefiles should at least know about the dependencies on Python's own .h files, so when you change something like opcode.h or node.h it is properly handled. Fred got bitten by this when he tried to apply the EXTENDED_ARG patch.) Personally, I think that the "recurive Mke considered harmful" paper is a bunch of hot air. Many highly successful projects - the Linux kernel, glibc, etc - use recursive Make. > If it ain't broken, don't fix it! Amen!
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4