Talk:Makefile: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Line 107:
:I kind of like the idea of portable makefiles but to be fair, it's better to be practical sometimes. The POSIX ''make'' is sort of rudimentary; I don't even know any projects actually trying to achieve ''make'' compatibility. Furthermore, most people are turning away from make (IMHO, for good reason). --[[User:Love4boobies|Love4boobies]] 15:59, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
::"Most people are turning away from make"? Not in the C/C++ world, they don't. (CMake, Automake, they all use make in the end, and I haven't heard of any non-make alternative making the mainstream.) -- [[User:Solar|Solar]] 05:15, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
:::Fair enough but in the same sense that CMake uses make, C compilers usually use assembly. What I meant was that makefiles tend to become very cumbersome for larger projects and that makes people want to learn something else instead. --[[User:Love4boobies|Love4boobies]] 08:22, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
| |||