Re: [Caml-list] One build system to rule them all?

[David Sheets <kosmo.zb@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 1:49 PM, Yotam Barnoy <yotambarnoy@gmail.com> wrote:
> It appears to me that every couple of months we hear of someone implementing
> yet another build system in ocaml. Given the success of opam, I think it's
> clear that sometimes a monolithic solution, behind which the entire
> community can organize, is the best solution -- especially for
> infrastructure.

opam is not a monolithic solution. For instance, it does not try to
mandate a build system and it uses external solvers if available.

> Looking at haskell, having cabal as the main build system
> has really helped them advance in terms of supporting other platforms (such
> as windows), and since all community efforts in this realm are focused on
> cabal, they can improve it rapidly.

Like all system design decisions, this is a trade-off. Cabal does
build and packaging. Cabal has some issues and limitations that may
not be fixable without major reworking.

> a. Is there any build system we can organize behind to crown as the official
> build system?

What is "official"? People get hit by buses, governments fall,
requirements change. I don't want an "official" build system.

> b. What are the use-cases missing from specific build systems, that have
> driven people to use other build systems?

Code-base size, dependency management, foreign-function binding, code
generation and staging, transparency, documentation, speed...

> c. To pick one possible candidate, if ocamlbuild were spun out of the
> compiler, could it be enhanced to cover all the main use-cases so (almost)
> everyone would be happy with it?

Probably not. One size does not fit all.

> It's just such a shame to see the ocaml community re-inventing the wheel
> over and over again, each time with some limitation so that the next person
> needs to do the same thing yet again.

A build system is considerably more complicated than a wheel. In many
cases, the issues responsible for re-work stem from design and social
factors, not technical problems. It's not clear to me that *any*
language community has actually completely solved the build system
problem. Writing and promoting a new build system which solves old
problems and does not regress the status quo seems like a laudable, if
thankless, goal.

If you'd like to contribute to a build system project to help it cover
more use cases and become The One True Build System, I suggest getting
involved with the project you feel has the best design, project
management, and philosophy and contributing your time and patches.

Best regards,

David