141–150 of 190 posts
Meson[0] has been gaining in popularity and has migration tools for cmake projects. Large projects such as systemd and gnome[1] have migrated or have been migrating for years [0] https://mesonbuild.com/ [1] https://wiki.gnome.org/Initiatives/GnomeGoals/MesonPorting
Meson[0] has been gaining in popularity and has migration tools for cmake projects. Large projects such as systemd and gnome[1] have migrated or have been migrating for years [0] https://mesonbuild.com/ [1] https://wiki.gnome.org/Initiatives/GnomeGoals/MesonPorting
Earlier quoted context omitted.
what about Bazel ? https://bazel.build/
Bazel is very slow and heavy and only Google uses it.
I'm probably biased as I write and maintain Starlark for C++ codebases on a daily basis.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Python also has version compatibility issues, such as: python2.x, 3.x. Also need the user to install the specified version of python
Any new project will very, very likely be using Python3. It appears like that applies to meson. `python3` is the expected binary (`python` is still expected to point to Python 2 for the foreseeable future and `python2` being the explicit binary--some distros have jumped the gun on `python`). Similarly, they have completely different accompanies executables (pip3, wheel3, pydoc3) and completely separate library paths.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Python also has version compatibility issues, such as: python2.x, 3.x. If that really bothers you then just create a virtual environment and locally deploy whatever version you want to run. That issue ceased to be a concern years ago.
> just create a virtual environment Yaw super lightweight ...
a developer post a well rounded tool with documentation that was built with a lot of care. The comment thread is mostly about other tools or people dismissing the work done because another available offer is more popular or common. When did "Show HN" threads became shark tank? Can people at least check and post about the tool itself instead of discussing CMake vs Ninja vs Meson?
People tend to stick to familiar topics ... as shown in the next Meson comment turned to Python2-vs-Python3-compatibility in a whim.
This is really great work, great documentation. It looks like CMake, but with a full featured scripting language.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> if they'd just add a makefile (and maybe ./configure) That's the whole point of cmake. Instead of running autotool's ./configure (which in fact is a whole dance involving autoconf, autoreconf, automake, and whatnot) just run cmake . to get yourself a fancy makefile.
if cmake was any good, the makefiles it produces would be portable, and distributing the cmake program itself would be unnecessary
As for distributing CMake, the intention is presumably that it's installed on the system of whoever's going to build the code, like make, or gcc, or whatever.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Python also has version compatibility issues, such as: python2.x, 3.x. Also need the user to install the specified version of python
Any new project will very, very likely be using Python3. It appears like that applies to meson. `python3` is the expected binary (`python` is still expected to point to Python 2 for the foreseeable future and `python2` being the explicit binary--some distros have jumped the gun on `python`). Similarly, they have completely different accompanies executables (pip3, wheel3, pydoc3) and completely separate library paths.…