I love tup so much. It's a "functional reactive" build tool that practically nobody's heard of, so I'd argue that it's even more "hipster" than make (whatever

I love tup so much. It's a "functional reactive" build tool that practically nobody's heard of, so I'd argue that it's even more "hipster" than make (whatever that means). When I decided I needed a single build system to replace a hodgepodge of stuff, I looked at make because that was apparently the go-to thing. It took me about 2 minutes to decide that I wanted no part of make. I'd assumed it was basically what Tup is. I'm lucky that I learned about Tup from a thread on this site, because it's made me so happy (especially once the initial pain was over... and yeah, you have to change). So whenever I see these posts, I make sure that someone is mentioning Tup as a clean alternative. edit: to be explicit, Tup is obsessed with speed and correctness, and handles incremental builds optimally (see Mike Shal's whitepaper on this). The "price" is that you can't modify files during a build. A file is either "regular" (not touched by build) or "generated" (produced wholly from one build rule). You have to describe the complete DAG up front. Because of all this, Tup will actually remove build targets when they're not needed, which I believe no other build system does. I could never go back.