Cross compilation

It looks, from the CVS log, that work is underway to get a build made with the GCC tools.
I hope that Norcroft support will be retained; as both the official toolchain and also because there is just so much wrongness in this one line:

Leading spaces in makefile changed to tabs for GNU make compatibility

But, then, I’ve always believed make to be horrible (I use AMU and try to avoid make which complains about stuff and then builds the project correctly, what?).

Enjoy: http://www.conifersystems.com/whitepapers/gnu-make/

The other day I saw something in the AMU manual that was to the effect of “this strange behaviour is not a bug, but a deliberate alignment with how GNU Make does things”. Enough said?

I just figured it was because gcc support in the source tree was a bit rickety and needed some work.

I hope that Norcroft support will be retained; as both the official toolchain and also because there is just so much wrongness in this one line:

Leading spaces in makefile changed to tabs for GNU make compatibility

Both GCC and Norcroft can be used with a lot of build tools – it does not HAVE to be GNU Make (or AMU or even !Make). How about smake, CMake, tmake, qmake…or how about introducing some Java-based stuff like ANT, Maven or Gradle.

Makefiles are really a bad idea. Unfortunately, all other build stuff also seems to be a bad idea. It is basically THE unsolved problem of software development. And the more cross-platform it gets, the hairier it becomes.

Aho, Weinberger and Kernighan’s wonderful book The AWK Programming Language, in section 7.4 has as an example a short AWK program to implement the core idea of make, stripped of all the extra nonsense which burdens most make tools. Unfortunately it is hard to separate make from whatever command language your system provides.

it does not HAVE to be GNU Make (or AMU or even !Make). How about smake, CMake, tmake, qmake…or how about introducing some Java-based stuff like ANT, Maven or Gradle.

Or Jam.