4 ms·
Ah, I see your point now. However, in practice this is not the case. These hash-based systems scale very well in large organizations. Some more info from Google
by dfgdghdf 8y ago
Ah, I see your point now. However, in practice this is not the case. These hash-based systems scale very well in large organizations. Some more info from Google about Bazel: https://qconsf.com/sf2010/dl/qcon-sanfran-2010/slides/AshishKumar_DevelopingProductsattheSpeedandScaleofGoogle.pdf https://qconsf.com/sf2010/dl/qcon-sanfran-2010/slides/Ashish...
- rusk 8y agoVery interesting ... Two bullet points jumped out at me straightway: - Single monolithic code tree with mixed language code - Development on head; all releases from source Just one other concern I have now. Something like Make, or most other build-systems run pretty much straight out of the box. Something like Bazel lets say is apparently an order of magnitude more complicated. There's a few more moving parts. My only remaining qualm relates to the additional cognitive load of this stuff. At scale, as in Google this isn't so much a problem because these costs would diminish at the point where you can actually assign people to look after it. I really like the idea though! Would be nice to work in a place like Google some day ...