14 ms·

The manual states that "just is a command runner, not a build system," and mentions "no need for .PHONY recipes!" This seems to suggest that there's no way to p

by hgs3 2y ago

The manual states that "just is a command runner, not a build system," and mentions "no need for .PHONY recipes!" This seems to suggest that there's no way to prevent Just from rebuilding targets, even if they are up-to-date. For me, one of the key advantages of using Make is its support for incremental builds, which is a major distinction from using a plain shell script to run some commands.

klabb3 2y ago
Maybe it’s the stacks I’m using, but I’ve always had incremental happen with language-native tooling like `go` or `cargo`. So for me at least, having lazy eval features like that would be an unnecessary increase in scope and complexity. With Just, I can just throw together different commands and it just works cross platform. I love it. I much prefer that than the other way, ie letting language tooling become command runners (looking at you npm). That’s the worst of both worlds.
- hgs3 2y ago
  > I’ve always had incremental happen with language-native tooling like `go` or `cargo` That makes sense, but for me, Make is incredibly useful for incremental file processing outside of programming. I've written tiny Makefiles that use glob patterns to batch-convert thousands of SVGs into PNGs and WebPs, but only for the modified SVG files. I've used Make to batch-convert modified LaTeX files to PDFs and render modified Blender projects into WebM videos for the web. Rendering videos is very time-consuming, so only rendering modified video files is a huge win.
guipsp 2y ago
If you need incrementalism, Just is not for you.
pdimitar 2y ago
The programming languages that I use don't need to be told to not rebuild from scratch so yours is a pretty strange argument.
BeetleB 2y ago
Your first sentence says: > just is a command runner, not a build system And then you go ahead and complain that it is poor at building. If you need a build tool, don't use just. Use make or something else. The purpose of just is to stop putting non-build stuff in Makefiles. And of course, it has a nice set of features that make doesn't.
- hgs3 2y ago
  I think there's been a misunderstanding. > Your first sentence says My first sentence was me quoting the Just manual and my second sentence was my observation about what that suggests. I wasn't asserting whether it's true or not, just sharing my interpretation, as I'm not familiar with Just. > And then you go ahead and complain that it is poor at building. I did not "complain" I stated that incremental builds, regardless of whether Just has them or not, is one feature I personally like about Make. Going by the responses I received, Just does not appear to support incremental builds and a simple acknowledgement, minus the vitriol, would have sufficed.

by hgs3 2y ago

klabb3 2y ago

Maybe it’s the stacks I’m using, but I’ve always had incremental happen with language-native tooling like `go` or `cargo`. So for me at least, having lazy eval features like that would be an unnecessary increase in scope and complexity. With Just, I can just throw together different commands and it just works cross platform. I love it. I much prefer that than the other way, ie letting language tooling become command runners (looking at you npm). That’s the worst of both worlds.

hgs3 2y ago
> I’ve always had incremental happen with language-native tooling like `go` or `cargo` That makes sense, but for me, Make is incredibly useful for incremental file processing outside of programming. I've written tiny Makefiles that use glob patterns to batch-convert thousands of SVGs into PNGs and WebPs, but only for the modified SVG files. I've used Make to batch-convert modified LaTeX files to PDFs and render modified Blender projects into WebM videos for the web. Rendering videos is very time-consuming, so only rendering modified video files is a huge win.

guipsp 2y ago

If you need incrementalism, Just is not for you.

pdimitar 2y ago

The programming languages that I use don't need to be told to not rebuild from scratch so yours is a pretty strange argument.

BeetleB 2y ago

Your first sentence says: > just is a command runner, not a build system And then you go ahead and complain that it is poor at building. If you need a build tool, don't use just. Use make or something else. The purpose of just is to stop putting non-build stuff in Makefiles. And of course, it has a nice set of features that make doesn't.

hgs3 2y ago
I think there's been a misunderstanding. > Your first sentence says My first sentence was me quoting the Just manual and my second sentence was my observation about what that suggests. I wasn't asserting whether it's true or not, just sharing my interpretation, as I'm not familiar with Just. > And then you go ahead and complain that it is poor at building. I did not "complain" I stated that incremental builds, regardless of whether Just has them or not, is one feature I personally like about Make. Going by the responses I received, Just does not appear to support incremental builds and a simple acknowledgement, minus the vitriol, would have sufficed.