On 05/17/2017 01:32 PM, bartc wrote: > Sometimes, if there's a problem. But usually the code is doing something > sensible. The stuff in configure is complete gobbledygook (if anyone > doesn't believe me, just have look).
Well trying to edit an executable in a disassembler would look like gobligook as well. configure is a generated script from a compiler called autoconf. It is compiled from some high-level macros that are somewhat easier to understand. The system is convenient because we can abstract away differences in target OS platforms more easily. > It is impossible that all this is needed just to figure out what > source files need to be compiled. (If it generated CPython sources > fractal-style, then I might be impressed, but doesn't.) What a wonderful simplification! But yes, you're essentially correct. All this gobbligook figures out how to best configure the features and options you require, determines whether your system has the required compilers and libraries, figures out what source files should be compiled, and calculates the order in which to build the source files. All of things things are very important. I'd rather have this and keep my build times down to seconds and minutes than have to recompile all million lines of code for just one change. I admit autoconf is hard to wrap my head around, hard to use as a programmer, and even harder to extend to handle new libraries and new compilers. You'd probably find scons more to your liking, and Qt's QMake facilities are very nice and simple, and cross-platform. But all of these generate Makefiles, which would likely be considered unnecessary gobbligook to you, I suspect. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list