(no title)
cytzol | 4 years ago
It has this functionality built-in, and avoids a lot of Make's idiosyncrasies. (Not affiliated, just a fan.)
cytzol | 4 years ago
It has this functionality built-in, and avoids a lot of Make's idiosyncrasies. (Not affiliated, just a fan.)
delusional|4 years ago
GordonS|4 years ago
Make is fiddly, has gotchas and is far from perfect, from the development side - but it's certainly "good enough", and it's great once you've got your Makefile done. And it's available, or at least easily attainable, pretty much everywhere. I even use it on Windows.
Arnavion|4 years ago
I use makefiles for my Rust code with just default+test+install targets that do no dependency tracking (since Rust's build system already does that much better). But if I need to add a target for, say, validating some OpenAPI spec that only needs to run if the spec file updates, then that can go in the same Makefile.
davidjfelix|4 years ago
1vuio0pswjnm7|4 years ago
https://github.com/rofl0r/jobflow
andreineculau|4 years ago
> GNU Make is a tool which controls the generation of executables and other non-source files of a program from the program's source files.
What is idiosyncratic is to think Make is first a command runner, and only after a file generator, and complain that it is doing a poor job at the former when it clearly says it is focusing on the latter.
I read the "idiosyncrasies" section on the just README and they are all performance related targeting file generation. All of those can be learned in one minute, as part of "I'll always find Makefiles in the wild, it's good to know the basics".
lights0123|4 years ago