[Scons-dev] Issues that can potentially be closed

[William Blevins]

>
> I would say that one Java() invocation maps to one launch of javac.  If you
> give a list of directories to Java(), it handles them all at the same time.
> If you want a lot of javac tasks in parallel, use multiple Java() builders.


I'm down with that.


> Frankly, I don't see anyone using scons for java projects that more
> complicated than "Hello world" or perhaps for testing a JNI implementation
> (which would be useful indeed).


And that's the unfortunate reality atm which is why I proposed dropping the
way scons emits via Java( ... ) at all.


On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Mark A. Flacy <mflacy at verizon.net> wrote:

> On Saturday, July 12, 2014 06:18:09 PM William Blevins wrote:
> > > There will certainly be cases where you would want both directories to
> be
> > > compiled as a single unit.
> >
> > And that's the question.  Is it the responsibility of Java( ... ) to
> > combine the sources or the responsibility of the user.  Do we want to
> allow
> > Java( ... ) to build anything in parallel or force the user to make
> > multiple Java( ... ) calls.  This is more about making an interface
> choice
> > than fixing a bug.
>
> I would say that one Java() invocation maps to one launch of javac.  If you
> give a list of directories to Java(), it handles them all at the same time.
> If you want a lot of javac tasks in parallel, use multiple Java() builders.
>
> Frankly, I don't see anyone using scons for java projects that more
> complicated than "Hello world" or perhaps for testing a JNI implementation
> (which would be useful indeed).
>
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 6:09 PM, William Blevins <wblevins001 at gmail.com>
> >
> > wrote:
> > > Still doesn't support it
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 5:49 PM, Mark A. Flacy <mflacy at verizon.net>
> wrote:
> > >> On Saturday, July 12, 2014 10:22:18 AM William Blevins wrote:
> > >> > 2432 definitely duplicates 1772.  The only difference is that 2432
> > >>
> > >> proposes
> > >>
> > >> > a (bad) solution to the problem.
> > >> >
> > >> > Both give the example:
> > >> >
> > >> > Java('build',
> > >> >
> > >> >      [source1, source2],
> > >> >      JAVASOURCEPATH='src')
> > >> >
> > >> > And explain that "their" issue is that source1 and source2 build in
> > >> > parallel with separate javac commands; this is easily fixable with a
> > >> > FLATTEN call, but we still haven't asked the important question.  Is
> > >> > this working as designed and the documentation needs to be updated
> to
> > >> > reflect or is this a software failure?
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > V/R,
> > >> >
> > >> > William
> > >>
> > >> There will certainly be cases where you would want both directories
> to be
> > >> compiled as a single unit.
> > >>
> > >> *Especially* if at least one of those directories contains
> autogenerated
> > >> source that is created by an earlier build step.  (SCons didn't seem
> to
> > >> support this the last time that I thought about using it for Java, but
> > >> that
> > >> could be a faulty memory of mine.)
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Mark A. Flacy
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> Scons-dev mailing list
> > >> Scons-dev at scons.org
> > >> http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
> --
> Mark A. Flacy
> _______________________________________________
> Scons-dev mailing list
> Scons-dev at scons.org
> http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://two.pairlist.net/pipermail/scons-dev/attachments/20140713/ada532f3/attachment-0001.html>