Re: persistent but local tweaks to a node's environment

On Sun, Aug 1, 2021 at 12:20 PM Bill Deegan <[email protected]>
wrote:

> So at the time you call StaticObject(), for example, do you know what
> flags are needed for that  source?
>

No, I know what *extra* flags are needed for that source, not what those
flags will be added to. For instance I know I need to disable a warning
because of an unavoidable local false positive, but not to enable debug
information, or turn up optimizations.


>
> (if possible shorter paragraphs would make your explanations easier to
> digest..)
>

Yes, but then there isn't enough detail, and the discussion has tended to
not apply to the actual problem..


>
> Also according to your response above, I would set OBJSUFFIX in the
> Environment() which should be per build flavor.
>

Yes, per my previous email I'm doing that already. as the second to last
step, I Clone the main environment and customize it for each flavor, then
loop over all the targets (top level and below) for each build flavor.


>
> re a single pass in the SConscripts, if you're not directly calling SCons
> methods, but rather building up a "database" of the build which then gets
> processed, then it'd be possible to avoid multiple SConscript calls to each
> SConscript, however if the logic in those SConscripts doesn't different
> things for different variants, it seems like you'd only be adding more
> complexity to your "database" of build info.
>
> Honestly, the further you get from plain SConscripts, the harder it will
> be for developers to learn and work on your build system.
>


Yes, as I've mentioned several times, the idea of this is to get closer to
plain SConscripts and remove our extra layers. I'm trying to figure out how
to do that.

Gabe

_______________________________________________
Scons-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users