> The whole concept of "discovering" which compiler you have, what your linker is, and then using a DSL to generate a script that triggers shell commands is mor

> The whole concept of "discovering" which compiler you have, what your linker is, and then using a DSL to generate a script that triggers shell commands is more than a little bonkers if you stand back and look at it objectively. This concept is still the only way to go if you port your application on a different platform and OSes. In the past, we had way more unix variations with varying compile vendors and funky CPU architectures. Even today, good luck with making your app compile seemingly across BSDs, various Linux distros (modern and old ones), and Windows. I'll assume JBlow is doing all his development on and for Windows, so IMHO, using anything over simple "make" will be overkill - you already know the platform, you cook the binaries and you already know where your application will be run. What saddens me is the "modern" attitude in development: "if you don't have meson X or cmake Y, fu* off, you don't have to compile my program" vs. was done in the past: "I'll be happy you compile my program on your platform and configure script will make sure to adapt it. But drop me config.log if something happens. You don't need anything except a shell."