This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is this going to be like emerge? -- Terrible Tim 21:21, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
Next-generation, improved, easier, more reliable, faster... It sounds really like a Neutral POV [/ sarcasm] -- ren 19:52, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
Ren, I've updated the article to make it NPOV, I hope. Please take a look at it and see what you think; if you like it, then please remove your pov tag. --Andy 9 November 2005
From the article:
"Automatic dependency analysis built-in for C, C++ and Fortran."
and then:
"Built-in support for C, C++, D, Java, Fortran, Objective-C, Yacc, Lex, Qt and SWIG, and building TeX and LaTeX documents. Other languages or file types can be supported through user-defined Builders for other languages or file types."
Does that mean that D, Java, Objective-C, Yacc, Lex, Qt, SWIG and LaTeX are not fully supported?
Well, in the Java case, I guess the dependency is deduced by the compiler but what about the other languages/tools? don't they need dependency analysis? Ori 19:43, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
I just checked some "notable applications" using SCons. And I found some of them actually used CMake! Indeed, I found `CMakeLists.txt` files instead of `SConstruct` files in the top source directories. These applications seem to use CMake instead of SCons:
Should these two references be deleted from the list or were they really using SCons for some time (and maybe we should specify the dates they stopped using SCons if the two entries are not deleted) ?
-- Aither ( Talk to me) 16:52, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
- Ain't Google Chrome using Make by default...? 09:50, 28 Nov 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.65.244.23 ( talk)
Just removed one link added on rev. 83750835, because it's not directly related to SCons and does not add any useful knowledge to the subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.153.105.239 ( talk) 19:11, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
the history section is duplicated 2001:A61:2A22:D601:5CDB:B0CF:FD00:E56E ( talk) 19:17, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is this going to be like emerge? -- Terrible Tim 21:21, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
Next-generation, improved, easier, more reliable, faster... It sounds really like a Neutral POV [/ sarcasm] -- ren 19:52, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
Ren, I've updated the article to make it NPOV, I hope. Please take a look at it and see what you think; if you like it, then please remove your pov tag. --Andy 9 November 2005
From the article:
"Automatic dependency analysis built-in for C, C++ and Fortran."
and then:
"Built-in support for C, C++, D, Java, Fortran, Objective-C, Yacc, Lex, Qt and SWIG, and building TeX and LaTeX documents. Other languages or file types can be supported through user-defined Builders for other languages or file types."
Does that mean that D, Java, Objective-C, Yacc, Lex, Qt, SWIG and LaTeX are not fully supported?
Well, in the Java case, I guess the dependency is deduced by the compiler but what about the other languages/tools? don't they need dependency analysis? Ori 19:43, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
I just checked some "notable applications" using SCons. And I found some of them actually used CMake! Indeed, I found `CMakeLists.txt` files instead of `SConstruct` files in the top source directories. These applications seem to use CMake instead of SCons:
Should these two references be deleted from the list or were they really using SCons for some time (and maybe we should specify the dates they stopped using SCons if the two entries are not deleted) ?
-- Aither ( Talk to me) 16:52, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
- Ain't Google Chrome using Make by default...? 09:50, 28 Nov 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.65.244.23 ( talk)
Just removed one link added on rev. 83750835, because it's not directly related to SCons and does not add any useful knowledge to the subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.153.105.239 ( talk) 19:11, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
the history section is duplicated 2001:A61:2A22:D601:5CDB:B0CF:FD00:E56E ( talk) 19:17, 18 March 2023 (UTC)