Excerpts from Matti Niemenmaa's message of Sun Jan 18 19:47:46 +0100 2009:
Henning Thielemann wrote:
Matti Niemenmaa schrieb:
Announcing the release of Coadjute, version 0.0.1!
Web site: http://iki.fi/matti.niemenmaa/coadjute/ Hackage: http://hackage.haskell.org/cgi-bin/hackage-scripts/package/Coadjute <snip> How does it compare to http://hackage.haskell.org/cgi-bin/hackage-scripts/package/hake
Short answer: the question that comes to mind is "how does hake compare to make?" Coadjute seems to be more capable, in general, but then I don't know pretty much anything about hake.
Somewhat longer answer:
Coadjute is better in that: 1. hake's documentation is rather sparse. I have no idea what most functions do, or even what exactly the main program does. 2. hake doesn't seem to do parallel builds, but I'm not sure because of point 1. 3. Coadjute keeps track of command line arguments (see docs for details): for me this is really a killer feature, I don't know of anything else which does this.
ocamlbuild does this.
4. hake always uses timestamps, Coadjute can use MD5 hashes as well. 5. Coadjute can have arbitrary path specifications, hake's rules seem to be based on file extensions only, thus applying only to the current directory. Peter Miller's "Recursive Make Considered Harmful" comes to mind: http://miller.emu.id.au/pmiller/books/rmch/
[...] Moreover, it seems that Coadjute and ocamlbuild share a fair number of design choices, maybe having a look at it could be fruitful. Best regards, -- Nicolas Pouillard