Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Makefile I use with JavaScript projects

olioapps.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 525 posts

Re: The Makefile I use with JavaScript projects

#31

Post by crescentfresh »

drabiega wrote: post #24
masklinn wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think it’s useful to distinguish How and why? And what do you do of compilers which can do either based simply on the backend you select?

Personally, I think of transpilation as a subset of compilation. So a transpiler is also a compiler, and a compiler that has a readable language backend can do transpilation, which is a type of compilation.

u/masklinn still asks a good question though: there are tools that act on the source code for both "compilation" and "transpilation" (eg Kotlin), depending on the target platform. They do not distinguish, why should we?

Re: The Makefile I use with JavaScript projects

#32

Post by Posibyte »

gsaga wrote: post #26

Anyone here uses makefiles for anything other than compilation and build? One can use it to add some level of concurrency to shell scripts.

I use it for programming microcontrollers, FPGAs, and doing additional signal testing on those devices. I also use it to control some processes that keep some hobby IoT devices in sync. It's just a really handy way to do parallel jobs like that.

Re: The Makefile I use with JavaScript projects

#33

Post by ethagnawl »

fuball63 wrote: post #22

We use make for standardizing the way docker containers are built, pushed, tested, and run (debug and production modes). I even prefer it to docker-compose at this point, because it is more programmable.

If you're able, I'd be very interested in seeing some examples.

Re: The Makefile I use with JavaScript projects

#34

Post by fernandotakai »

rcarmo wrote: post #27

I use Makefiles extensively for Docker, all sorts of individual projects (it's much easier to "make serve" than remember the specific invocation for getting a dev server up when you use multiple programming languages) and, of late, for Azure infrastructure deployments: - https://github.com/rcarmo/azure-docker-swarm-cluster/blob/ma... - https://github.com/rcarmo/azure-acme-foundation/blob/master/...

i (and people at work) do the same thing! i find it really easy to work with docker/k8s/helm/compose with Makefiles.

one tip -- remember to use .PHONY on your targets -- https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/html_node/Phony-Tar...

Re: The Makefile I use with JavaScript projects

#35

Post by isaachier »

I started my career with C++ development and never used a direct makefile in any of my projects. When I write C/C++, I use CMake. My current job has me programming in Go where people seem to love makefiles, but I consistently find bugs in the implementation (usually has too many phony targets, etc.), Why don't people use makefile generators outside of the C/C++ community?

Re: The Makefile I use with JavaScript projects

#36

Post by dagw »

crescentfresh wrote: post #18
bringtheaction wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it’s useful to distinguish compilation whose target is another language that was originally intended to be human-readable (transpilation) from compilation to a form intended exclusively for machines (compilation to machine code or bytecode).

Compilation is the act of going from one language to another, machine or not. This is what I was taught at least. "Machine code" or "bytecode" holds no special distinction. In this article's case, there a reasonable exception to made when JavaScript is being "compiled" into JavaScript itself. For that, I don't know what the term is (or if there even is one).

For that, I don't know what the term is (or if there even is one).

Transpiler?

Transpiler has been around as a term in CS for a while now. Initially it was used for compilers that compiled from one dialect of assembly to another.

Re: The Makefile I use with JavaScript projects

#37

Post by bringtheaction »

crescentfresh wrote: post #18
bringtheaction wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it’s useful to distinguish compilation whose target is another language that was originally intended to be human-readable (transpilation) from compilation to a form intended exclusively for machines (compilation to machine code or bytecode).

Compilation is the act of going from one language to another, machine or not. This is what I was taught at least. "Machine code" or "bytecode" holds no special distinction. In this article's case, there a reasonable exception to made when JavaScript is being "compiled" into JavaScript itself. For that, I don't know what the term is (or if there even is one).

> [...] there a reasonable exception to made when JavaScript is being "compiled" into JavaScript itself. For that, I don't know what the term is (or if there even is one).

Well, given

trans : (+ acc.) across.

and

ipse ipsa ipsum : himself, herself, itself.

I propose we call that ipsumpilation ;)

More seriously though if the input is js and the output is js, and it’s not different versions of the language — e.g. es6 -> es5 (because imo that qualifies as different languages) — I’d call it an optimizer or a packer depending on what it does.

Re: The Makefile I use with JavaScript projects

#38

Post by sneak »

rectang wrote: post #23

Make's interface is horrible. Significant tabs. Syntax which relies on bizarre punctuation... If only whoever authored Make 40 years ago had had the design acumen of a Ken Thompson or a Dennis Ritchie! We're stuck with Make because of network effects. I wish that it could just become "lost" forever and a different dependency-based-programming build tool could replace it... but that's just wishful thinking. The pace o…

FWIW $$@ is target, because @ looks sort of like a bullseye.

significant tabs are gross, yes, but this is a one-time edit to your vimrc then you can forget about it forever.

it’s also installed everywhere and has minimal dependencies. it could be a lot worse. (see also: m4, autoconf, sendmail.cf)

Re: The Makefile I use with JavaScript projects

#39

Post by [deleted] »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #28
rectang wrote: post #23

Make's interface is horrible. Significant tabs. Syntax which relies on bizarre punctuation... If only whoever authored Make 40 years ago had had the design acumen of a Ken Thompson or a Dennis Ritchie! We're stuck with Make because of network effects. I wish that it could just become "lost" forever and a different dependency-based-programming build tool could replace it... but that's just wishful thinking. The pace o…

Make is such a horrifically awful thing to work with that I just end up using a regular scripting language for building. Why learn another language with all its eccentricities and footguns when I already know several others?

[deleted]

Re: The Makefile I use with JavaScript projects

#40

Post by rectang »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #28
rectang wrote: post #23

Make's interface is horrible. Significant tabs. Syntax which relies on bizarre punctuation... If only whoever authored Make 40 years ago had had the design acumen of a Ken Thompson or a Dennis Ritchie! We're stuck with Make because of network effects. I wish that it could just become "lost" forever and a different dependency-based-programming build tool could replace it... but that's just wishful thinking. The pace o…

Make is such a horrifically awful thing to work with that I just end up using a regular scripting language for building. Why learn another language with all its eccentricities and footguns when I already know several others?

Another advantage of using a scripting language is that the hard work of portability will already have been done for you by the authors of the scripting language.

Make, in contrast, works within a shell and invokes programs which may be either wildly or subtly incompatible across platforms. Add in the lacking support for conditionals in POSIX make and portability is a nightmare.

Post reply on HN