run VS Buck

I've been using Run [0] for this purposes.

[0]: https://github.com/TekWizely/run

To the extent that posts like these evolve into discussing the merits of Make as a task runner, I would like to offer my tool for review:

* https://github.com/TekWizely/run

I built it to feel like make, but be better at managing tasks and wrappers.

If you are evaluating task runners and appreciate the simplicity of Make's syntax, I hope you'll give Run a try.

I invite you take a look at Run, a similar tool that I maintain:

* https://github.com/TekWizely/run

Support for including other Runfiles was recently introduced, with support for globbing and the ability to indicate if an error should be generated if no files are found.

Unrelated to this topic, I invite you take a look at my project which a tool purpose-built to be a better version of what your makefile became:

Run: Task runner that helps you easily manage and invoke small scripts and wrappers

https://github.com/TekWizely/run

Defining commands feels like make, but comes with a bunch of extras targeted at the needs of a task-runner.

I hope you'll check it out!

This looks like an interesting way to manage scripts globally. I could even see it able to manage n-sub-commands deep (vs usual "command sub-command" - maybe it already does?) by just trying to resolve each argument as a dir until you find a script to execute.

If you're interested in ways to better-manage small scripts and wrappers more locally, please take a look at my project, Run:

https://github.com/TekWizely/run

For those looking for a powerful task runners that feel like a makefile, please take a look at Run:

https://github.com/TekWizely/run

It's better a managing and invoking tasks and generates help text from comments.

Hyper-large tech companies managing hyper-large monorepos using Bazel (google), buck (Facebook), please (thought machine), pants (Twitter, Foursquare & Square) enjoy them but also have a lot of resources devoted to running and maintaining it.

We use Buck company wide. Our packaging / deployment system, for example, expects to be given a Buck target to build, not a pre-built binary - I can’t just build my app with dotnet and upload it. While it is possible for a Buck target to be a simple bash command (i.e dotnet publish), doing so makes the target “opaque” - Buck wouldn’t have any knowledge of my app’s build graph so I’d lose many of the benefits it gives us (incremental cached builds etc.)

Oh excellent, then better (and more portable!) tools are available:

http://pants.build

https://ninja-build.org

https://buck.build

and, if you hate yourself: https://bazel.build

I’m feeling sorry for everyone affected.

Let’s hope that this isn’t going to impact Buck [0] too much. It’s one of the best things Facebook has ever made.

[0]: https://github.com/facebook/buck/tree/dev

Pioneered by tech giants like Google and Meta with tools like Bazel and Buck, monorepos are seeing widespread adoption across companies of all sizes and industries.

Buck has a http_file() that you can use this way, and it has first-class support for Java.

That's a good bridge into saying that we don't use pretty much any standard tooling. Our build system is Buck, we use Mercurial instead of Git, and the IDE of choice seems to be Visual Studio (although Android Studio is supported, with some custom plugins required).

Didn't know it was python based. Their github repo shows 90% of the code is java, only 2% is python. Regardless, C++ build systems should be written by people who are familiar with C++ and the specific problems they need to solve. That means the build system should be written in C++ or C and not in java, lua, or python. I certainly do not want to install python just to build my C++ programs in a CI environment, it just increases my build complexity and attack surface

The landing page of https://buck.build/ explains some of the most basic stuff. This Meta Engineering blog post summarizes some of the deeper optimizations possible through buck: https://engineering.fb.com/2017/11/09/android/rethinking-android-app-compilation-with-buck/