shake
min-sized-rust
Our great sponsors
shake | min-sized-rust | |
---|---|---|
11 | 101 | |
755 | 7,431 | |
- | - | |
6.7 | 6.2 | |
4 months ago | about 1 month ago | |
Haskell | Rust | |
BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised" License | MIT License |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
shake
-
Ninja is enough build system
Another interesting implementation is Shake: https://shakebuild.com/
It is technically a Haskell DSL, but supports Ninja files, time estimates and has tools for linting and profiling.
-
Buck2: Our open source build system
They explicitly refer to Shake build system and Build Systems a la Carte paper.
-
Straightforward Makefile Tutorial that bring together best practices once and for all.
The one paper that gave me hope about build systems was Build systems à la carte: Theory and practice, by Andrey Mokhov, Neil Mitchell, and Simon Peyton Jones. Among other things, it describes the theoretical underpinnings of the Shake build system. To be honest I believe any build system that ignores the maths described in this paper can safely be ignored. (You may however ignore the paper itself if the maths checks out. See Daniel J. Bernstein's redo, which matches Shake very closely.)
-
Worst language you ever used? Really used not just looked at the manual.
Yeah, they don't have to be terrible. I haven't used it, but people in my circles tend to really like Shake, which uses a Haskell embedded DSL to describe builds.
- Shake Build System
-
Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats facing the GNU Autotools
You could try Shake. It's a sane build system written by a former co-worker of mine. https://shakebuild.com/
-
Overview of the CMake controversy, and break down the pros and cons of the critical C++ tool.
Shake does require compilation as it's essentially just a Haskell library providing a DSL and it works just fine, I guess in gradle's case it's a thing about Java-typical overengineering and complete blindness to resource usage. Shake's underlying engine can actually go head-to-head with ninja itself when building ninja files.
-
Need recommendations for a dependency-tracking system
Did you look at shake: https://shakebuild.com/ ?
- The Shake Build System
-
Trouble Linking Dynamic Library for Package
For reasons I don't want to get into, I am building my own GHC package without cabal. The documentation is a little sketchy, but I've succeeded in build and installing it in my own user database (I'm on linux x86_64, using GHC 8.6.5). I am using shake to do all of this, and I've been pretty pleased with how it works.
min-sized-rust
-
The Linux Kernel Prepares for Rust 1.77 Upgrade
This is a good guide on building small Rust binaries: https://github.com/johnthagen/min-sized-rust
This talks about going to extreme lengths on making the smallest Rust binary possible, 400 bytes when it was written, https://darkcoding.net/software/a-very-small-rust-binary-ind...
The thing is, you lose a lot of nice features when you do this, like panic unwinding, debug symbols, stdlib… for kernel and some embedded development it’s definitely important, but for most use cases, does it matter?
-
Rust wont save us, but its ideas will
Oh it was 137, haha. I will link you to this older comment of mine: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29408906
See also https://github.com/johnthagen/min-sized-rust
-
Making Rust binaries smaller by default
Are you sure? If so then this is awesome news, but I'm a bit confused; the commit in that min-sized-rust repo adding `build-std` to the README was merged in August 2021: https://github.com/johnthagen/min-sized-rust/pull/30
Are you saying that at that point the feature still hadn't "landed in Rust nightly" until recently? If so then what's the difference between a feature just being available in Rust nightly, vs having "landed"?
-
Was Rust Worth It?
Rust binaries are by default nowhere close to 500MB. If they are not small enough for you, you can try https://github.com/johnthagen/min-sized-rust. By avoiding the formatting machinery and using `panic_immediate_abort` you can get about the size of C binaries.
-
Compiling Rust binaries for Windows 98 SE and more: a journey
A useful reference: https://github.com/johnthagen/min-sized-rust
- How to minimize Rust binary size
- Error on flashing embedded code to stm32f103
-
Tiny Binaries (2021)
That must be without stripping. Also there are ways to reduce binary size. See e.g. [min-sized-rust](https://github.com/johnthagen/min-sized-rust). I've gotten stripped binaries of small cli utils less than 400KiB without doing anything special, less than 150 KiB by customizing profile settings and compressing with upx, and less than 30 KiB by replacing the std with the libc as the link shows. Haven't tried with fltk though...
-
Shared libraries
This is not quite what you're asking, but it does also address the underlying concern: https://github.com/johnthagen/min-sized-rust
What are some alternatives?
gitHUD - command-line HUD for your git repo
smartstring - Compact inlined strings for Rust.
marvin - The paranoid bot (framework)
Cargo - The Rust package manager
leksah - Haskell IDE
rustc_codegen_gcc - libgccjit AOT codegen for rustc
shake-language-c - Cross-compilation framework based on the Shake Haskell library.
c2rust - Migrate C code to Rust
bumper - Haskell tool to automatically bump package versions transitively.
regex - An implementation of regular expressions for Rust. This implementation uses finite automata and guarantees linear time matching on all inputs.
clone-all - clone all the github repositories of a particular user.
embedded-graphics - A no_std graphics library for embedded applications