3 ms·
With the disclaimer that I don't know the Bazel and I have started over 20 years ago, I still think incremental builds are much more important for developer eff
by lmilcin 6y ago
With the disclaimer that I don't know the Bazel and I have started over 20 years ago, I still think incremental builds are much more important for developer efficiency especially in environments and languages where they have to rebuild entire binary.
Methods that can help you achieve that goal faster are more valuable than ones that are completely correct but require more time to execute.
Most massive improvement in developer experience is if you can get feedback immediately without lapse in your concentration.
Production build for me is something that happens in the background after I have pushed my code and moved to work on something else and so it has very little effect on my productivity. It is nice having it complete in seconds but it does not hurt my productivity significantly even if it takes a whole day, as long as I can continue getting feedback on my current coding task (ie. I have working local environment where I can fully test with little overhead0.
At the most extreme example, I have worked on a credit card terminal where you needed a whole week to get the application built and deployed on a real device because it had to be built by a special compiler on another host and then once it builds it had to get approvals and get signed by external company.
It of course did not affect my productivity in the long run as I found ways to quickly compile and run the functionality outside the real device.
- paulddraper 6y agoBazel, Buck, et al are for large monorepo code bases, where recompiling and retesting the entire code base for every changes is prohibitively expensive, even for CI.