4
junon
43d

Word of advice: Don't use Meson.

It's fundamentally flawed. The maintainer doesn't understand build system theory whatsoever. How Meson has become so popular is mind boggling to me.

Comments
  • 1
    Can't wait to learn a bodged together custom scripting language for my easy-to-use build tool

    Why would I wanna waste time using a language I already know
  • 0
    @12bitfloat Can't tell if you're agreeing with me or not haha
  • 1
    @junon OK. I'll take the bait.

    Hard evidence, lengthy explanation, momma wants to know _everything_
  • 1
    @junon Just being sarcastic :D For some reason all build systems suck and think their specific DSL is where it's at
  • 0
    @IntrusionCM meson#422 - I don't want to direct link it, but that contains the discussion that ultimately pushed me away.
  • 1
    @junon so. You don't explain, you don't want to hotlink, but others should stay away from it based on the non existing hotlink and your non existent explanation....

    Lol. Hell no.
  • 0
    @IntrusionCM Wat. I gave you a direct issue number on the repository to check yourself. I don't want to direct link because I don't want the maintainer to see the traffic coming from devRant on the analytics page on Github.

    If you can't figure out how to find an issue on Github, that's not my problem.

    The issue I mentioned has the full explanation, written by me, before it was closed and locked by a maintainer, never to be spoken about again.
  • 0
    @junon lil sour chili pickle, ain't ya?
  • 0
    @IntrusionCM ... what? What more do you want from me? I told you exactly where to go to find the explanation lmfao.
  • 2
    To whoever downvoted: that's not how downvotes work on devRant.
  • 1
  • 0
    yeah, from reading some of the issue you posted on github, I see what you mean. It doesn't seem like meson is bad per se (I never used it myself, and builds that were using it usually worked really well for me) but the maintainer seems to be convinced it can't be improved and doesn't seem to be even open to the idea of recursive subprojecting... which yknow... I understand his point of view and the idea of having the maintainer manage *everything* granularly... there are some good advantages to that imo, but on the other hand it's also crippling the build engine because it's making it quite limiting for usage on bigger more complex projects... this makes meson best for small projects only :/ which seems unfortunate...
  • 2
    @Hazarth Designing it correctly wouldn't be hard at all - in fact, I would wager it'd be less work than his crazy-ass "wrap" system he devised.

    He's just decided that no project should be structured that way, period - even though that's very much not the case.

    XOrg (a huge project) just switched to Meson and its given me one more reason why dislike that project.
  • 1
    @junon Seems like they overengineered their "beautiful" way of doing things that doesn't work and now they can't / don't want to change it
  • 1
    I didn't like meson because it used the same ontology, more or less, as CMake. Which I despise. Still, I thought it could be like a CMake-but-less-insane.

    That issue re: nested subprojects though. Wow.

    What's left now? Autotools? (I am not being sarcastic.)
Add Comment