• lysdexic@programming.devM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    it’s a build system itself, it doesn’t need make or whatever and compilation speeds are similar to ninja – which means it can do things like distributed building – and implement local caching, like ccache but supporting msvc as well as gcc/clang (actually msvc might be disabled at the moment) – … likewise remote caching, like Mozilla’s sscache for teams (again supporting msvc/gcc/clang)

    So it offers nothing over cmake, and at best it matches features already offers for ages, such as transparent support for compiler cachês and distributed compilers.

    it has its own package manager but also works with pretty much all other popular package managers –

    That lies somewhere between matching cmake’s features, and placing users in a losing proposition with its own package manager.

    can configure project with a TUI menu xmake f --menu

    Not only is this irrelevant but it is also something cmake provides.

    Also, cmake is the de facto standard and supported natively by IDEs such as Visual Studio.

    Knowing this, why would anyone bother with xmake?

    • leviosa@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      So it offers nothing over cmake…

      In your opinion, I’d say the overall integration and being an actual build system are offerings for starters.

      It also supports other languages like Zig, Pascal and Rust too. Here’s an example of C++ calling Rust, note the easy inclusion of Cargo crates…

      https://github.com/xmake-io/xmake/tree/dev/tests/projects/rust/cxx_call_rust_library

      xmake is just nicer, more concise and 100% less shouty. People in general use cmake because it’s the de facto standard, not because they like cmake and its DSL.

      xmake can generate cmake files too so it’s not going against the grain. There are plugins for popular IDEs as well.

      • lysdexic@programming.devM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        xmake is just nicer, more concise and 100% less shouty.

        Not really. It’s yet another build system whose main aspiration is to eventually match cmake’s capabilities but missing all the reasons that made cmake the de facto standard, such as the declarative straight to the point way of specifying targets.

          • lysdexic@programming.devM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            lots of people use xmake

            Define “lots”.

            Also, your weekend pet project is not the same as a corporation’s cash cow.

            • leviosa@programming.devOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Close to half of C++ developers in that survey regularly use something other than CMake and I’ve seen projects at Microsoft and Epic Games use xmake. Why are you being such a pecker?