|
|
|
|
|
by rtpg
1 day ago
|
|
so then my glib question: what is the purpose of this project? It does look like for some projects it's almost entirely "just declare the dep tree" (https://github.com/allyourcodebase/boringssl), + the tiniest patch. But what's going on in grpc for example? Like this build file https://github.com/allyourcodebase/grpc/blob/master/build.zi...... why is this build file in this repo? Is the grpc makefile no bueno? Efforts to pull out information from existing build systems (if possible, ofc) means that you don't have to spend your time _rewriting build scripts_. I don't know if it's really possible. Maybe this is step .. 4 of 34 to getting there. Just wondering if there's an alternative here that doesn't involve rewriting build scripts Maybe a part of the pitch here is to just upstream these build scripts so that ones makefile becomes "just" `zig build`? In that case I'd actually like to see (for example) a fork of oyacc using what is figured out in https://github.com/allyourcodebase/yacc to "just" use the build script even in the higher level project. |
|
The whole point is to massively simplify integrating those libraries into Zig projects by explicitly not having to deal with external build systems or separate C/C++ compiler toolchains.
> Is the grpc makefile no bueno?
Does it work out-of-the-box on Windows? That's usually the first question when encountering a Makefile (and just looking at the first lines of the Makefile, it doesn't, instead it needs to run inside mings: https://github.com/grpc/grpc/blob/a63b3a4d949a7057a0e5443e7a...).
With Zig you usually only need the Zig toolchain, which runs just fine in a regular Windows cmd.exe.