Hello, My two cents as a Qt user and occasional Meson contributor.
I have the feeling that a Qt build system will always force the users to choose between another tool they know but where the Qt support might not be the best and a Qt focused tool with a good Qt support but they will have to deal with external libs and might suffer corner cases. What I like with Meson is the fact that Qt support isn't that bad and I can easily link any other non Qt lib plus ship them with wrapdb. Then cross compiling is really easy. Then I don't know for Qbs but small features like enabling coverage with one simple option are nice with Meson. As Qt user I started with qmake, I enjoyed writing projects with qmake then I switched to CMake to make easier usage of non Qt libs and config. Finally I switched to Meson and won't go back to CMake. I'm not sure I would switch to Qbs unless it gets less Qt focused. I still miss the point of making a dedicated build system instead of contributing to more general build systems like Meson or even CMake. Le lundi 16 octobre 2017 à 15:46 +0300, Konstantin Tokarev a écrit : > > 16.10.2017, 15:06, "Kevin Kofler" <kevin.kof...@chello.at>: > > Tobias Hunger wrote: > > > I am still missing a comparison of qbs and *current* build > > > system options. > > > All I see is qbs vs. qmake and qbs vs. cmake 2.x. Neither qmake > > > nor cmake > > > is what qbs will be competing with by the time it is ready to be > > > used in > > > earnest. > > > > > > So far we excluded most possible build systems on the grounds > > > that they do > > > not support the mixed host/target builds we do. That requirement > > > is going > > > away. So we have more options now. Just to name two: Bazel > > > promises great > > > scalability and reliability, meson claims to be simple and fast. > > > Even > > > CMake made a lot of progress since version 2.x. > > > > This is the first time I hear of Bazel, so it cannot be that > > popular. The > > fact that it is written in Java also makes it a poor fit for Qt, as > > it would > > make Qt depend on the huge Java stack to build. > > That tool is made by Google and tailored for Google internal needs. > As we've learned > with gyp, they don't mind to abandon their stuff next day when > something more cool > and more tailored comes out. > > > > > Meson is, as far as I can tell (I had already looked at it a couple > > times), > > mostly a CMake clone written in Python. I fail to see how it is > > conceptually > > any different from (let alone better than) CMake. It is mainly > > pushed by > > GNOME developers who are fed up of stone-age autotools, but > > apparently do > > not want to use the same thing KDE uses (CMake) just because KDE > > uses it. The huge difference is the fact that it is a description langage, no function no macro. > > I have no real experience with Meson, but at least it has following > advantages: > > * Its language is typed(!), has native support for arrays(!), and > functions/methods have > first-class return values(!) > * Its language has native support for properties, with syntax that > really looks like > properties in another languages > * It is target-oriented from the start and is not so burdened by > legacy ways of doing > things wrong, which plague old CMake projects and confuse newcomers > * It is written in scripting language, so it's easier to add (and > possibly distribute) new > functionality without getting it through upstream hands first. > > That said, I totally dislike the idea of inventing restricted DSL > language for build system > instead of using general purpose language (like e.g. in QBS or > Premake). Not being Turing complete is a choice and makes it really clear at the end. I don't know Qbs but looking the doc and the rules stuff seems like Qbs allows functions. > > > > > Kevin Kofler > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Development mailing list > > Development@qt-project.org > > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development > > _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
