I said "we use" and was questioning the general approach, which is the mainstream as far as I understand.

And I can also understand that most of the first Perl programmers came from a C background.

I'm certainly not criticizing you and thankful for you sharing your approach.

My concern was on a meta level ...

I've heard people talking about Ruby's own native build process Rake and the benefits and synergies this creates.

I've heard people talking about Ruby's own native build process Rake and the benefits and synergies this creates.

I think you have a good point mentioning this.

One may suggest that Perl could use its own Make-like program. It certainly could.

But then again, maybe not if one looks at it from the point of view of spawning "yet one more of these". GNU Autotools uses Perl heavily. Perhaps Perlers of the 90's thought that can be a synergy. And it was. Albeit it relies also on m4.

> > I've heard people talking about Ruby's own native build process Rake and the benefits and synergies this creates.

> I think you have a good point mentioning this.

FWIW I found 3 projects on CPAN with attempts in emulating Rake:

• https://metacpan.org/pod/Stepford
• https://metacpan.org/pod/Kook
• https://metacpan.org/pod/distribution/Daiku/script/daiku

Cheers Rolf
_{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
Wikisyntax for the Monastery}

Again, I'm meditating on a meta level.

There is a lot of UNIX and C legacy involved that I don't really master.

Neither do I know Rake or Build.Pl well.

It just seems strange to me to generate code in another language to execute code in a third one.

This must be error prone.

Cheers Rolf
_{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
Wikisyntax for the Monastery}