On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 11:34:29PM -0400, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > On 2014-08-26, 6:05 PM, Mike Hommey wrote: > >On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:40:39AM -0400, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > >>>Well, reading this thread, it doesn't seem mach build dir is broken for > >>>the use people make of it, which is to build in a single directory. What > >>>people want apparently, is more being able to build a single file or set > >>>of files, more than a directory and its subdirectories. > >>>And ninja is not going to change anything for people wanting to rebuild > >>>a few files when changing a header. In fact, it would likely make things > >>>harder for them. > >> > >>Not at all, quite to the contrary. You can build specific targets with > >>ninja just fine, and it's non-recursive and fast and all. :-) > > > >You can't say "build all things in foo and its subdirectories", can you? > > I think you can. As an example from the clang's generated ninja build > system, they have targets such as: > https://gist.github.com/ehsan/02bb4f129e72dad5ee52 > > Basically I think you are able to define a tree of targets, which can map to > the file and directory structure of the source dir.
That's nice, but that doesn't map to what people want here (and we have dependencies close to what you pasted here in our build system, but it's not exposed). What you could do, i guess, is have phony targets for directories, listing all the corresponding object files. IOW, you won't have that working magically without writing code to make it so. Not that it's a problem, but it just means it's a use-case you'd have to have in mind when writing a ninja backend. Same problem with the make backend. The question then becomes, what is really the usecase people want, because they've been relying on weird properties of the build system for eons, and expect that to keep working. Mike _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
