[VWWHFSfQ]

Make is painful to use unless you're producing C object files. And even then it's painful to use.

But we get it, you don't want to try anything new.

[nrclark]

There's no reason to reinvent a tool that has literally decades of development behind it, is included in pretty much every Linux distro, and does what you need.

Dismissing it as being for olds is short-sighted.

[sarlalian]

There are plenty of reasons to reinvent tools that have existed for literally decades and are included in pretty much every Linux distro.

1. Someone wants to do it. Most open source is developed because someone just wants to. 2. You aren't happy with the language it's written in C vs Rust. 3. The tool is lacking some set of features that you want. 4. The tool isn't as easy to use as you would like. 5. The tool doesn't support some platform you care about. 6. Using the tool requires more knowledge or cognitive load than you would like. 7. The tool you are replacing has multiple variants that have different feature sets slightly different supported syntax (gnu make vs bsd make).

[jonjojojon]

Just has the advantage that it is really cross platform instead of having subtly different "makes" on the unixes and windows.

Same issue with bash. Having something that really cares about windows support is useful.