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

From: Silvan Jegen <s.jegen_AT_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 09:55:52 +0200

On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Anselm R Garbe <garbeam_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> 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?

That would of course be the clean solution. A build system like ninja
just fights the symptoms but I am afraid that is the best that can be
done in some cases...


Cheers,

Silvan
Received on Wed Jul 26 2017 - 09:55:52 CEST