[veltas]

It does seem that 'modern' idioms tend to just be doing the same thing in a more obfuscated manner. Just a .c/.h pair would have been easier to add to your source.

[krychu]

This is a valid point. I was on the fence between doing .c/.h pair and a single .h. But finally took the inspiration from: https://github.com/nothings/stb.

[veltas]

Overall I think the code in the library is good, this was just the thing that stuck out to me most. Congrats on getting shared on HN.

[NavinF]

That would be easier if the most popular build systems weren’t terrible

[wott]

If the library is installed separately, the terribleness is about adding "-lfunkylib" to your linker command.

If you embed the source in your project, the terribleness is about adding to your Makefile:

  funkylib.o: funkylib.c
       $(CC) $<

  myfinalexe: ... funkylib.o ...
       # your existing executable creation (linking) command

[pjmlp]

Or I don't know, people actually bothered to learn them.

[wizzwizz4]

Learning something doesn't stop it being terrible. One time I ran `cmake`, and forgot to run `sudo -k` beforehand. It reconfigured my system.

[pjmlp]

That has more to do with sudo than cmake.

[wizzwizz4]

This might be an unpopular opinion, but compiling a program into a local directory shouldn't try to install packages globally. `make install`, I could understand doing that.

I had no idea that cmake would do this, after reading quite a lot of things about cmake v.s. make and how to write various makefiles for them. I posit that the C build tools are fundamentally hard to comprehend.

[pjmlp]

Any build tool can do whatever they feel like.

Blindly trusting it will lead to the same outcome, regardless of the programming language ecosytem.