fenics team mailing list archive

[Matthew Knepley <knepley@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

"tomtzigt" <tomtzigt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Matt:
>
>   I think I understand where you are coming from but I just want to make
> sure: are you saying that the support systems that surround a typical code
> are frequently anemic and are rehashed where it should have been redone?
>
>   I am very interested in hearing your thoughts on how you have solved the
> build and configuration problem: we spent millions of dollars a year on this
> problem, and if there is a solution, I would like to know!

  Solved is something I reserve for math problems (even there it is dicey),
but engineering solution "do better". We definitely kick autoconf's butt,
and nothing comparable exists in Windows since they have such ironfisted
control. I will talk about this at FEniCS '05.

         Matt

> Theo
>
> P.S. the reason why make is still so ubiquitous is that when you start with
> an OS port, particularly in the old UNIX days, you tend to bootstrap the
> whole development with make. You have your hands full with getting the
> kernel going that you really didn't have time or interest in first rewriting
> your build environment. Now all the developers are proficient with make, and
> the rest is then simple familiarity. This is still happening today when
> folks are creating new sw development environments for embedded devices. 

   I would lump this mindless make fad in with the overall lack of creativity
or ambition in the OS arena (e.g. Rob Pike's article on the death of OS
research). However, this is also another contributing factor. I believe the
abstractions are EXTREMELY weak. Make introduces the DAG and a single predicate,
then stops. Packaging systems are worse. I don't believe OS even begins before
Hoare's theory of cooperating processes. Our configure has made a little progress
I think, but the build stuff is still crap, albeit better crap than make. I
would love it if we made progress here.

         Matt
-- 
"Failure has a thousand explanations. Success doesn't need one" -- Sir Alec Guiness