>>>>> "Soren" == Soren A <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Soren> IOW, the way Automake is designed is to make keeping a very Soren> complex package's dependencies tracked so that it can be Soren> smarter than the developer -- so that if the developer (package Soren> author / maintainer) forgets to update something by running the Soren> appropriate Autotool command, the Makefile will cause it to Soren> happen for him/her. This means nests inside nests inside nests Soren> of recursive interdependency, a hideous logical mess to try to Soren> mentally untangle and the primary thing that makes standard Soren> Automake-generated Makefiles unreadable by humans. First, the maintainer can disable these update features. Many maintainers do. Second, this part of the generated Makefile is pretty small. I disagree that this part is really that hideous, or unreadable. Other parts are less readable, for instance the way automake generates lots of intermediate targets which have no purpose but to simplify automake's implementation (or perhaps simplify some old implementation, and which now are truly useless). Soren> IMHO this is an error of Greek-Epic proportions on the part of Soren> the Automake author, a deranged distortion of the Virtue of Soren> Hubris Automake Rex. Soren> A system that tries to relieve the developer to THAT degree, of Soren> ordinary vigilance and concentration on his/her task, is IMO a Soren> major mistake and something to be regarded with deep healthy Soren> skepticism. It would help if you could be specific. Sometimes I've erred in making errors of things that perhaps should go unnoticed. But the situation isn't nearly as clear and simple as you try to make it. For one thing, giving fewer errors means more developer time spent reading automake's output. Soren> Nothing about the GNU documentation for Autotools claims that Soren> you *have to* use Automake at all. In principle it is perfectly Soren> possible to use Autoconf, and even Libtool, without using Soren> Automake. Not only in principle. Many packages exist which do this. Emacs. gcc. gdb. binutils. Etc. Soren> Attention is relative and comes as cumulative impact of many Soren> instances of complaints as well as response to single-authored Soren> instances of cogent critique. ...which this isn't. Cogency implies persuasiveness. Flamage is, well, merely irritating. Or, to put it another way, there's nothing in your message that either induces me, or even provides me enough information, to make any specific modification to automake. (Though I will immediately start removing all the hideousness, not to mention the various influences of Agamemnon.) >> I am certain that if somebody would create an elegant, working, >> unified cross-platform replacement for auto*+libtool+make, written in >> *one* language of choice (preferrably some Lisp variant, or Perl, >> instead of the current mixture of C, /bin/sh, m4, and Perl), many >> software writers would embrace it. For all we know one of the automake maintainers is already working on one. :-) Tom
