[rust-dev] RFC: Future of the Build System

Gaetan gaetan at xeberon.net
Tue Jan 14 08:28:49 PST 2014


rust need llvm, make, wget, bash script, python, autotools... it's just a
matter of choice of which external tool you accept to rely on....

-----
Gaetan



2014/1/14 George Makrydakis <irrequietus at gmail.com>

> Lack of manpower. Correct. As I have written elsewhere in these threads,
> this is why an interim solution of a third party tool should perhaps be
> choosen, instead of sactioning a build system in any language relic X as
> the official tool.
>
> Closer to 1.0, the need will become more apparent. I do not see a task
> team / working group proposing this and in order for any official guideline
> to be followed, this is a step to be taken. Wasn't this the purpose of this
> thread?
>
> Perhaps this is what comex is trying to say, albeit with his own peculiar
> rhetorical structure - I doubt that anybody is "trolling", knowingly. I
> still think that for the intended scope, Rust should just need Rust.
>
>
> Gaetan <gaetan at xeberon.net> wrote:
>>
>> However, I'd say there is a stunning lack of existing build systems
>>> that actually combine a clean design, flexibility, portability, and
>>> performance.  autotools fails badly on design, performance, and
>>> (ironically) portability; cmake fails on design (seriously, try to
>>> read any cmake script)
>>
>> Same than any language, you can write bloated code or quite pretty
>> things. Just be consistent and think reusability
>>
>>
>>> and flexibility (a lot of stuff is hard coded
>>> in C++ and hard to change);
>>
>> I don't see what you say is hardcoded? At worst, I simply had to rewrite
>> a import module.
>>
>>
>>> most of the alternatives I know about are
>>> at least slow, and often poorly maintained, insufficiently general, et
>>> cetera.  The only build tool I really like is ninja, and it's
>>> designed to be used with input generated from a separate tool rather
>>> than alone.  So I'd personally like to see a new build system regardless.
>>>
>>
>> I also agree that having a proper build system sounds sexy, however do
>> the rust dev team has enough man power for that?
>>
>> Why not try to assemble a task that will evaluate several existing build
>> system instead of just trolling in this thread, to see exactly what are the
>> advantages and flaws of each candidates?
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/rust-dev/attachments/20140114/b5ef1549/attachment.html>


More information about the Rust-dev mailing list