More power to GPRbuild

[OneWingedShark]

@SweetAda

Well, fortunately the whole world thought different, since they adopted Make.

I find really offensive to blame Make AFTER it helped the software community.

The same could be said of Unix, and C, and a myriad of other bad-yet-widely-adopted decisions.
Is make exempt from criticism because it is widely used?

You were the one who brought the subject up, saying, “Don’t understand why people hate Make.” — is explaining people’s experiences and criticisms, that is the dislike/hate, offensive to you? If so, why?

@SweetAda

So you are considering computer programmers of the ‘50s sorta of stupid primitive beasts, since they programmed only in assembler ?

I’m not saying they were stupid, but it would be wrong to say that they never did anything stupid.
Null-terminated strings are an excellent example of stupid — being able to assess, honestly, past mistakes is absolutely a needed skill; as is the ability to critique “consensus”. Just because “that’s the way we’ve always done it” or “everyone else is doing it” are generally not sufficiently convincing arguments to me.

@SweetAda

In the meantime, I will sit and wait for tools able to build GCC or the Linux kernel.

And yes, even before those precious tools will reach that point, probably AI will write something that overcome everything.

What?
I don’t see how this ties into the rest of your post; unless you’re going out of your way to assume an assertion that GNU and/or POSIX are not only unmitigated good, but beyond critique. — Which I don’t think you’re doing. So, why put this in your post?

[dmitry-kazakov]

@jere

That doesn’t generate the right kind of files for what I need. These aren’t intermediate files but ones that are generated after the fact to get a specific output format

You can always add whatever you wanted by scripting the driver. For example:

project Hello is
   for Main use ("hello.adb");
   package Compiler is
      for Driver ("Ada") use "./my_gcc.sh";
   end Compiler;
end Hello;

and this is the script:

#!/bin/bash
PATH="$PATH:/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/13"
gcc $*
name=${@: -1}
name=${name%%.*}
objdump -t ${name}.o > ${name}.txt

[dmitry-kazakov]

@SweetAda

Well, fortunately the whole world thought different, since they adopted Make.

Where did you get that? There is a gazillion of build tools. make was always quite a niche.

@SweetAda

I find really offensive to blame Make AFTER it helped the software community. So you are considering computer programmers of the ‘50s sorta of stupid primitive beasts, since they programmed only in assembler ?

There was no make in 50’s. Nor in 60’s. If you are interested, people used batch processing, e.g. JCL. Nor assembler was very popular, except for DEC machines. MACRO-11 was exceptionally good. But majority used FORTRAN, COBOL, PL/1, Algol 60. Make came first when the Dark Age of computing began, with UNIX destroying everything.

@SweetAda

In the meantime, I will sit and wait for tools able to build GCC or the Linux kernel.

I see no problem bootstrapping GCC using gprbuild.

[SweetAda]

I asked “why people hate Make” because I read criticisms about a great tool that, out of discussion, was and is widely used. It is my precise duty to defend a tool that is such an useful thing.

Too many of your observations to respond, I have no time so far, sorry. Maybe later.

[SweetAda]

@dmitry-kazakov

There was no make in 50’s. Nor in 60’s. If you are interested, people used batch processing, e.g. JCL. Nor assembler was very popular, except for DEC machines. MACRO-11 was exceptionally good. But majority used FORTRAN, COBOL, PL/1, Algol 60. Make came first when the Dark Age of computing began, with UNIX destroying everything.

Thanks for the infos. But I think you misunderstood my message between the lines. Besides that, you guys are insisting in blame something that was/is useful, in those days.

@dmitry-kazakov

I see no problem bootstrapping GCC using gprbuild.

I will avoid to ask you how (see next reply).

[SweetAda]

@dmitry-kazakov

@jere

That doesn’t generate the right kind of files for what I need. These aren’t intermediate files but ones that are generated after the fact to get a specific output format

You can always add whatever you wanted by scripting the driver. For example:

project Hello is
   for Main use ("hello.adb");
   package Compiler is
      for Driver ("Ada") use "./my_gcc.sh";
   end Compiler;
end Hello;

and this is the script:

#!/bin/bash
PATH="$PATH:/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/13"
gcc $*
name=${@: -1}
name=${name%%.*}
objdump -t ${name}.o > ${name}.txt

…

So you have anyway to call an external stupid UNIX shell in order to have your problem solved.

BTW, Make can do this thing without write a separate file. Just write it in a recipe.

I find it simpler, don’t you ?

[JeremyGrosser]

This topic was meant to be a submission of a project idea, it has devolved into an argument about make and Unix philosophy. This thread is now locked.