4 ms·
I also was trying to figure out why I would use this over Bazel. Then I remember reading a story yesterday about how ex-googlers miss their tooling when they le
by grosales 6y ago
I also was trying to figure out why I would use this over Bazel. Then I remember reading a story yesterday about how ex-googlers miss their tooling when they leave. Their CTO is an ex-googler, so maybe this is the reason.
- lvh 6y agoBut Bazel is developed by Google itself right now. Presumably if you missed Google tooling you'd rather use Bazel, no? I'm not suggesting Bazel is perfect: I think e.g. Starlark's insistence on being a separate language does more harm than good. (FWIW I also think the JVM objection is a little silly.) But I am saying preferring the Google tooling would ostensibly mean you like Bazel a lot already :)
- kortex 6y agoI've read Bazel without the rest of Google tooling (giant monorepo of everything, distributed build farms, etc) the experience is nowhere near the same.
- laurentlb 6y agoWhat do you mean with "insistence on being a separate language"? Many build tools have their own DSL.
- lvh 6y agoStarlark is _almost_, but not quite_ Python, and Python 2 at that. You could do everything Starlark does in actual Python and get stuff like static type checking for free. I think the term DSL is overloaded here? Consider all the Lisp and Ruby stuff that's definitely DSL but doesn't need most of a language implementation.