Re: [dev] [ANN] samurai: ninja-compatible build tool

From: Anselm R Garbe <garbeam_AT_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 09:25:28 +0200

On 26 July 2017 at 09:05, Silvan Jegen <s.jegen_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Michael Forney <mforney_AT_mforney.org> wrote:
>> On 7/25/17, Silvan Jegen <s.jegen_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 7:32 AM, Michael Forney <mforney_AT_mforney.org>
>>>> Even if you don't care for ninja, it does seem to be gaining
>>>> popularity, and I've noticed several projects start switching from
>>>> autotools to meson (which outputs ninja), so I thought it would be
>>>> good to have a small C implementation. It was also a fun project.
>>>
>>> I have seen that some of the Wayland projects I care about are working
>>> on switching to meson but I did not know that it uses ninja under the
>>> hood.
>>>
>>> Since you seem to have plenty of experience with ninja, do you think
>>> it has any advantages over using a Makefile containing 20-50 lines of
>>> code?
>>
>> No, not at all. Definitely use a Makefile for that case.
>
> That's what I suspected. Not sure it's desirable to ever work on a
> codebase big enough to require a build system which uses ninja under
> the hood. If I find myself in such a position I will turn to samurai
> first.

Out of curiosity, what is the point of a build system like ninja, if
the codebase requires to be complex? Isn't the issue to be tackled the
codebase complexity then?

-Anselm
Received on Wed Jul 26 2017 - 09:25:28 CEST