On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 09:17:52 -0700 Christoph Junghans <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Ninja doesn't support Fortran as well. > Besides not supporting the full feature set.
That does not seem to be effecting meson. Which only supports ninja. A considerable amount of projects are switching to meson, look around. I have switched over a couple projects I am working on. I have worked with all three, autotools, cmake, and meson. I prefer cmake + ninja. The performance of meson vs cmake is negligible. Given cmake cpack, I prefer that for now over meson. I could not make a strong case for speed of cmake vs meson. That is moot speed wise, pretty equal. Meson maybe a tad faster. > Ninja vs make didn't seem to make big time difference (for cmake at > least). Back in 2013 ago only found a 40sec difference (of an 6.5 min > overall build) when building kdelibs averaging over 3 builds, which > had more than 40s scatter in the individual builds. It is making huge differences in other projects. I have seen considerable time savings in the smaller projects I am working on, ecrire, entrance, clipboard, and some others. Enlightenment desktop for 0.23 release will have dropped autotools entirely for meson. 0.22 already ships with meson. I switched over and it builds faster. No problems there with ninja. I think EFL may switch to meson as well. Other E projects like rage have already. > That coincides with my own experience outside of portage where ninja > and make are pretty much even for a full build, but ninja is much > faster in figuring out which parts to rebuild in a partial build. Maybe time to check again. My experience says otherwise. I can switch over some stuff in travis and show via CI the difference in time. I see it all the time in development doing routine builds as part of code, build, test, code, etc. Rinse and repeat. -- William L. Thomson Jr.
pgpaAQR5qEBTJ.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
