3 ms·

How is this better than http://industriousone.com/premake http://industriousone.com/premake ?

• i80and 14y ago
  Wrong question; they're working on different levels of abstraction. Ninja is designed to be a very fast and lightweight tool for doing work based on a dependency graph: actually knowing how to build anything on its own is an explicit non-goal. Premake, on the other hand is a full-blown build system that can make decisions and knows about how to perform specific code-related tasks, and can then generate rules for other tools to follow. Unless I'm mistaken, Premake could hypothetically output a build.ninja file.
• vgnet 14y ago
  It seems to be faster (starts building faster) and gives progress information make lacks. See http://neugierig.org/software/chromium/notes/2011/02/ninja.html http://neugierig.org/software/chromium/notes/2011/02/ninja.h... (for motivation) and https://plus.google.com/108996039294665965197/posts/SfhrFAhRyyd https://plus.google.com/108996039294665965197/posts/SfhrFAhR... (for benchmarks). TLDR: Firefox takes 14m to fully build with make and a nop build takes 57.9s, Chrome takes 30m with ninja, but a nop build takes only 0.74s.
• drothlis 14y ago
  I don't know the design goals of premake but ninja is very very fast at deciding what to build (a no-op build of a large project that might take a traditional make system several seconds, is almost instantaneous with ninja, allegedly). For those already using CMake--ninja will slot right in. Are there any large projects using premake? Ninja+gyp is used by Chromium.