4 ms·
I strongly agree with this. Everyone complains about C and C++ build systems, but they were designed to be easy to begin with. Then projects grew in size and th
by flumpcakes 4y ago
I strongly agree with this. Everyone complains about C and C++ build systems, but they were designed to be easy to begin with. Then projects grew in size and there wasn't a "standard" way to do things so people came up with their own systems. We now seem to be standardizing around CMake for better or worse.
On the flip side, Rust makes the usual cause very easy, with the ability to to pull in code with a single line in a config file (I would argue this is probably a double edged sword - I've some some Rust projects that look like they're a javascript project with a thousand dependencies). I think the "simple" case of compiling Rust without cargo is more complicated and has a higher friction.
Perhaps this isn't fair, complaining about Rust's build system when you're off the beaten path because it's difficult with loose footing. C++ doesn't really have a beaten path (Well since C++17 it's slowly become CMake), that's why all the routes are so well trodden...