From rantcafe at wizardwell.org  Thu May 31 19:28:41 2007
From: rantcafe at wizardwell.org (Jon Willesen)
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 17:28:41 -0600
Subject: [Rant-cafe] Bug: task ordering is wrong when dependencies are
	listed	separately
In-Reply-To: <20070531160401.2l2jdk5a84s8gogg@webmail.xmission.com>
References: <20070531160401.2l2jdk5a84s8gogg@webmail.xmission.com>
Message-ID: <20070531172841.yumnqelny88sgwwk@webmail.xmission.com>

So after looking at the code I see there's an 'enhance' function  
available to do this sort of thing.  Using the enhance function to add  
the dependency works great.

The only reference to 'enhance' that I could find in the documentation  
was in rubyproject.rdoc in some example code.  Shouldn't this function  
be listed under the available functions at the top of rantfile.rdoc?   
Or is it not ready for public consumption yet?

-- 
Jon Willesen


Quoting Jon Willesen:

> I've been looking at replacing our C++ make system with Rant, and I
> noticed some funny behavior.  I'm using version 0.5.8.
>
> Here's a Rantfile that demonstrates the problem:
>
> task :cart do
>    puts 'cart'
> end
>
> task :horse do
>    puts 'horse'
> end
>
> task :cart => :horse
>
> Because of the nature of our system, it'd be nice to list the
> dependencies separately from the task definitions.  However, in it's
> current form, the tasks happen in the wrong order.  The output is:
>
> C:\rantexp>rant cart
> cart
> horse
>
> Running this same file through rake gets it right:
> C:\rantexp>rake -f Rantfile cart
> (in C:/rantexp)
> horse
> cart
>
> If I change the file so the dependency is listed with the task
> definition, Rant does the right thing:
>
> task :horse do
>    puts 'horse'
> end
>
> task :cart => :horse do
>    puts 'cart'
> end
>
> C:\rantexp>rant cart
> horse
> cart
>
> -- 
> Jon Willesen



From rantcafe at wizardwell.org  Thu May 31 18:04:01 2007
From: rantcafe at wizardwell.org (Jon Willesen)
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 16:04:01 -0600
Subject: [Rant-cafe] Bug: task ordering is wrong when dependencies are
	listed	separately
Message-ID: <20070531160401.2l2jdk5a84s8gogg@webmail.xmission.com>

I've been looking at replacing our C++ make system with Rant, and I  
noticed some funny behavior.  I'm using version 0.5.8.

Here's a Rantfile that demonstrates the problem:

task :cart do
    puts 'cart'
end

task :horse do
    puts 'horse'
end

task :cart => :horse

Because of the nature of our system, it'd be nice to list the  
dependencies separately from the task definitions.  However, in it's  
current form, the tasks happen in the wrong order.  The output is:

C:\rantexp>rant cart
cart
horse

Running this same file through rake gets it right:
C:\rantexp>rake -f Rantfile cart
(in C:/rantexp)
horse
cart

If I change the file so the dependency is listed with the task  
definition, Rant does the right thing:

task :horse do
    puts 'horse'
end

task :cart => :horse do
    puts 'cart'
end

C:\rantexp>rant cart
horse
cart

-- 
Jon Willesen





From rantcafe at wizardwell.org  Thu May 31 18:07:57 2007
From: rantcafe at wizardwell.org (Jon Willesen)
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 16:07:57 -0600
Subject: [Rant-cafe] Rant is great - how can I help?
Message-ID: <20070531160757.tse9jqu6xc880w4k@webmail.xmission.com>

I've been looking at replacing our C++ make system at work and I'd  
really like to use Rant because it has a great feature set for  
building C++ projects.  I think the ruby based build systems hit a  
sweetspot where they are flexible and powerful without being overly  
heavy and difficult to learn.

Based on the total lack of response to Russel Winder's emails, it  
seems like Rant is on the verge of suffering a total existence  
failure.  I'd really like to keep Rant alive in some form, since Rake  
doesn't do what I need.  I recently reported a bug, and I'll probably  
take a shot at fixing it, even though I'm only a novice rubyist.  Is  
there any hope of merging Rake and Rant into a unified tool so they  
don't have to compete with each other, let alone all the other build  
systems out there?  What can I do to help to keep Rant around?

-- 
Jon Willesen