[CMake] Gyp VS CMake

[Michael Wild]

On 02/19/2011 06:16 PM, Jed Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 17:16, Michael Wild <themiwi at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Well, cl.exe for one doesn't do this trick. This means, you'll have to
>> put it in your build system, and once you've done that, why should you
>> use the compiler then? Especially, since you'll want to be consistent
>> across platforms.
>>
> 
> You can use LD_PRELOAD (DLL injection on Windows) to pick up the
> dependencies. That has the advantage of automatically working for any
> compiler or other custom command, for any source language. Tup does this.
> 

Tup was already discussed on this list quite some time ago. Using
LD_PRELOAD to do those things makes my skin crawl. You need to intercept
system calls AND C-library functions and have to hope that the compiler
isn't doing some crazy stuff you haven't considered...

I really like the concepts behind Tup, and it is blazingly fast, but
that funky hijacking business makes me really uncomfortable. OTOH, if
the author of Tup really can make it watertight, backed up by an
extensive test suite which you can apply to your toolchain in order to
be sure it works fine, I could get used to the idea ;-)

Michael