This is quite cool and very useful for people with slow machines, who like to play around and make lots of changes, or both. It’s also a solution for incremental builds discussed in this story that was on lobste.rs a week ago:
That said, using Make is joyful and convenient for simple tasks. These features from bmake that are missing from GNU Make are really nice:
(0) built-in support for separate src/obj trees (1) meta mode (self-tracking build system) (2) logical AND operators && and || are supported in .if and .elif conditional structures (3) variable modifiers (could harm readability)
It would be nice if bmake gains the sandbox feature like landlock-make.
Bazel’s symlink tree (_virtual_includes) is quite annoying for editors and Clang based tools, unless you have some way to resolve the symlinks to the original files.
This is quite cool and very useful for people with slow machines, who like to play around and make lots of changes, or both. It’s also a solution for incremental builds discussed in this story that was on lobste.rs a week ago:
https://blogsystem5.substack.com/p/netbsd-build-system
First of all, Make has significant problems for non-trivial projects: https://lobste.rs/s/41brzz/is_it_worth_using_make
That said, using Make is joyful and convenient for simple tasks. These features from bmake that are missing from GNU Make are really nice:
(0) built-in support for separate src/obj trees (1) meta mode (self-tracking build system) (2) logical AND operators
&&and||are supported in.ifand.elifconditional structures (3) variable modifiers (could harm readability)It would be nice if bmake gains the sandbox feature like landlock-make.
Bazel’s symlink tree (
_virtual_includes) is quite annoying for editors and Clang based tools, unless you have some way to resolve the symlinks to the original files.