[bognition]

I’m on board with most of this. The one suggestion I’d add is to replace “make” with “just”

[underdeserver]

I hear about it every now and again and I can't seem to grok the benefit. What's the killer feature over make?

[kstrauser]

First, I grok make. I'm saying this from a position of familiarity, not of ignorance and fear.

Make is great at compiling code in languages that don't have bespoke build systems. If you want to compile a bunch of C, awesome. For building a Rust or JavaScript project, no way. Those have better tooling of their own.

So for the last 15 years or so, I've used make as a task runner (like "make test" shelling out to "cargo test", or "make build" calling "cargo build", etc.). As a task runner... it kinda sucks. Of course it's perfectly capable of running anything a shell script can run, but it was designed for compiling large software projects and has a lot of implicit structure around doing that.

Just doesn't try to be a build system. It's optimized for running tasks. Here, that means it provides a whole lot of convenient functions for path manipulation and other common scripty things. It also adds dozens of quality-of-life features that devs might not even realize they wanted.

For example, consider this trivial justfile:

  # Delete old docs
  clean:
      rm -rf public

  # This takes arguments
  hello name:
      @echo Hello, {{name}}

If you're in a directory with it and run `just --list`, it'll show you the list of targets in that file:

  $ just --list
  Available recipes:
      clean      # Delete old docs
      hello name # This takes arguments

That second recipe takes a required command line argument:

  $ just hello
  error: Recipe `hello` got 0 arguments but takes 1
  usage:
      just hello name

  $ just hello underdeserver
  Hello, underdeserver

You can do these things in make! I've seen it! Just doesn't add things that were impossible before. But I guarantee you it's a lot harder to implement them in make than it is in just, where they're happy native features.

There are a zillion little niceties like this. Just doesn't try to do everything make does. It just concentrates on the smaller subset of things you'd put in .PHONY targets, and makes them really, really ergonomic to use.

You wouldn't use just to replace make in a large, complicated build. I would unhesitatingly recommend it for wrapping common targets in repos of newer languages, so that `just clean build test` does the same things whether you're in Python or TS or Rust or whatever, and you don't want to hack around all of make's quirks just to build a few simple entry points.

[BeetleB]

If you're an expert in make and already have a Makefile, I would not recommend switching to just for that project.

The benefit of just is that it's designed to be a command runner, whereas make is designed to be a build tool. justfile syntax is much simpler and more ergonomic. It also has nice features: Private recipes, submodules, recipes that you can specify to run only in a particular OS (we use the same justfile for both Windows and Linux), writing your recipes in a language other than your shell language, and many many other niceties.

A new user can start doing "advanced" stuff in just in a couple of hours. They'll take a lot longer if trying to do it via make.

[pletnes]

Just is fantastic for any project - also non-code ones!