3 ms·
One thing that has really disappointed me with Make and friends is that we have Maven and SBT now. Suddenly Make , Autotools, CMake , Scons ,.... they all just
by dkhenry 14y ago
One thing that has really disappointed me with Make and friends is that we have Maven and SBT now. Suddenly Make , Autotools, CMake , Scons ,.... they all just seem so archaic compared to the amazing simplicity that is SBT. Automatic dependency resolution, incremental compilation, simple project publishing, no writing of build scripts ever.
The only other build system I know of that comes close is Go's built in system, but that appears to be more because of their instance on no linking
- swdunlop 14y agoThese friendly high abstraction build systems show their teeth when they meet configurations that deviate from abstractions. Go's a great example -- if $GOROOT or parts of $GOPATH are not owned by the build user, "go build" will occasionally fail because a pacman or aptitude update touched the compiler and Go needs to recompile every package in sight. When dealing with JNI, both Maven and SBT have to delegate the task to less pure build systems. For projects that cannot nest nicely above a very high and consistent layer of abstraction, these "archaic" systems are essential because of their lack of interfering abstractions. They observe a different definition of "simple", instead of being "simple to use in a specific problem domain" they go to "simple to adapt to a different problem domain."