Re: [PATCH] MakeMaker, XS and C++

Nicholas Clark wrote:

> I don't think that "using make is not a problem at all" is a valid argument.
> ExtUtils::MakeMaker already jumps through a lot of hoops to (try to) make
> portable makefiles. For example, we had a load of fun trying to work out
> why SDBMFile broke on a MakeMaker change. It worked on Linux, but not
> FreeBSD. Not the two most distant OSes in the world.
>
> The perl5 core doesn't have a single Makefile for all of Unix and Win32.
> In fact, it doesn't have a single Makefile for Win32. Every make is
> different. Sometimes those differences bite.
ok, make has more problems than just "existential" ones, but that 
does not invalidate my point: using make also has some benefits.
I'm not against Module::Build. I just think that both builders 
can coexist. M::B will be better in some cases and EU::MM in 
others. Let the programmer decide which one he prefers to use.
Perl motto is TMTOWTDI, isn't it?

- Salva.