On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 01:48:35AM +0800, Pickfire wrote:
> Kamil Cholewiński <harry666t_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > I think it might have been possible to use some other build tool to
> > > achieve something similar, but I don't think it would have worked out
> > > as well.
> >
> > http://gittup.org/tup/ ?
>
> I did a benchmark against tup, make, mk, ninja back then.
> What I learn:
>
> - make is the fastest
> - ninja needs to be run twice
> - tup is slowest (probably didn't use monitor) but easy to write
> - mk is slightly slower than make
ninja claims to be "as fast as possible" but starts shell instead of
executing programs directly like make does.
Received on Tue Mar 28 2017 - 23:27:27 CEST