4 ms·

Hi there, I work at Google on the Protocol Buffers team. The Abseil team will soon be adding CMake support (and automake, I hope). We need this for Protocol B

Hi there, I work at Google on the Protocol Buffers team. The Abseil team will soon be adding CMake support (and automake, I hope). We need this for Protocol Buffers, which currently supports CMake and automake.

shahms 9y ago
Why would you wish maintenance of either of those things on your coworkers?
- haberman 9y ago
  As grandparent illustrates, this matters to users. So it matters to me too.
  - shahms 9y ago
    As one of your users, I'd really like to stop maintaining our own BUILD files for proto :-)
    - haberman 9y ago
      I don't follow what you are saying. Protobuf has a BUILD file: https://github.com/google/protobuf/blob/master/BUILD https://github.com/google/protobuf/blob/master/BUILD Do you mean something else? A GitHub issue might be a better place for this discussion.
    - packetslave 9y ago
      As another of your users, I really wish the proto_library BUILD rules were open-source :-)
      - DannyBee 9y ago
        If you feel like you are missing implicit dependencies on building haskell in your project, you could always just add it.
        mintplant 9y ago
        I wasn't aware Protocol Buffers had any relation to Haskell; would you mind explaining what you're referring to here?
        7197ghr918hf 9y ago
        Googler-on-googler trolling. The internal version of the build rule they're discussing has some busted dependencies. Because of historical cruft, it brings in a lot of unrelated crap. For example, building a C++ binary might build bring in Haskell dependencies because of a protocol buffer. This is being fixed, but it's been a thorn in our sides for years.
        DannyBee 9y ago
        To expand a bit, the proto_library rules were "famously" broken in that it never knew which outputs were actually used (Or so i believe that was the cause, it's been a while) Thus, it assumed the output was needed for any language specified in the proto library rule. So if your proto library rule offered a haskell version, anything using that proto library rule would do what was necessary (usually, building haskell stuff) to make that output. The more people offered more languages in their rules, the worse it got. I believe this was eventually fixed (i stopped coding in the main repo years ago, these days, i only hack on open source projects). I expect one reason the rule was not open sourced was to not expose this cruft to the rest of the world :)
RcouF1uZ4gsC 9y ago
Glad to hear. This will make using it with our existing code base much easier.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
Camillo 9y ago
It would be nice if Bazel could generate CMake projects.
- gumby 9y ago
  Bazel make Cmake projects which then make make/xcode etc projects? If you have to program Bazel anyway why have it insert CMake?
  - ithkuil 9y ago
    so that other people can consume/build the library without having Bazel installed. (disclaimer: I love Bazel; I wish more people would just not be afraid of its size)

shahms 9y ago

Why would you wish maintenance of either of those things on your coworkers?

haberman 9y ago
As grandparent illustrates, this matters to users. So it matters to me too.
- shahms 9y ago
  As one of your users, I'd really like to stop maintaining our own BUILD files for proto :-)
  - haberman 9y ago
    I don't follow what you are saying. Protobuf has a BUILD file: https://github.com/google/protobuf/blob/master/BUILD https://github.com/google/protobuf/blob/master/BUILD Do you mean something else? A GitHub issue might be a better place for this discussion.
  - packetslave 9y ago
    As another of your users, I really wish the proto_library BUILD rules were open-source :-)
    - DannyBee 9y ago
      If you feel like you are missing implicit dependencies on building haskell in your project, you could always just add it.
      - mintplant 9y ago
        I wasn't aware Protocol Buffers had any relation to Haskell; would you mind explaining what you're referring to here?
        7197ghr918hf 9y ago
        Googler-on-googler trolling. The internal version of the build rule they're discussing has some busted dependencies. Because of historical cruft, it brings in a lot of unrelated crap. For example, building a C++ binary might build bring in Haskell dependencies because of a protocol buffer. This is being fixed, but it's been a thorn in our sides for years.
        DannyBee 9y ago
        To expand a bit, the proto_library rules were "famously" broken in that it never knew which outputs were actually used (Or so i believe that was the cause, it's been a while) Thus, it assumed the output was needed for any language specified in the proto library rule. So if your proto library rule offered a haskell version, anything using that proto library rule would do what was necessary (usually, building haskell stuff) to make that output. The more people offered more languages in their rules, the worse it got. I believe this was eventually fixed (i stopped coding in the main repo years ago, these days, i only hack on open source projects). I expect one reason the rule was not open sourced was to not expose this cruft to the rest of the world :)

RcouF1uZ4gsC 9y ago

Glad to hear. This will make using it with our existing code base much easier.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

Camillo 9y ago

It would be nice if Bazel could generate CMake projects.

gumby 9y ago
Bazel make Cmake projects which then make make/xcode etc projects? If you have to program Bazel anyway why have it insert CMake?
- ithkuil 9y ago
  so that other people can consume/build the library without having Bazel installed. (disclaimer: I love Bazel; I wish more people would just not be afraid of its size)