You're viewing a single thread.
-
Life is and will always be better writing your own Makefiles. It's literally so easy. I do not get the distaste. Cmake is arcane magic. Bazel is practically written in runes. Makefile is a just a glorified build script, but where you don't have to use a bunch of if statements to avoid building everything each time.
-
really anyone worth their salt should write perl code to generate makefiles depending on the phase of the moon and if you sacrificed a $chicken, a @chicken, or a %chicken at runtime.
-
It's one of those massively elegant concepts of the past that's become unfashionable to learn pretty much just do to time and ubiquity.
-
That works until you need to support Visual Studio or Xcode. Then you either maintain their stuff manually too, or you get CMake to generate all three. I don’t love it but it solves the problem it’s meant to solve. The issue is people using it when they don’t need to.
-
I'm not familiar with either why can't you use Make with VS or Xcode? Can you not set them up to have whatever build bind call Make ?
-
Tbh I’m not sure if you can. That’s proprietary IDEs for you.
-
-
Xcode implies MacOS, you can use make there too, just beware that some commandline tools take different arguments on BSDs.
-
You can build with mingw64 built with msvc and use more or less the same Makefile. As for Xcode... well, there's not really a good reason to support Mac. On principle I wouldn't even try
-
-
Manual makefiles don't scale though and you end up needing some other bootstrap framework pretty quick.
-
How the heck does a Makefile not scale??? That's all it does!
-
-
this is fine until you need autotools which is worse than cmake
-