Buck VS Less Boring New Tab

Buck mentions (8)

• Compiling a single-file app with csc.dll

  We use Buck company wide. Our packaging / deployment system, for example, expects to be given a Buck target to build, not a pre-built binary - I can’t just build my app with dotnet and upload it. While it is possible for a Buck target to be a simple bash command (i.e dotnet publish), doing so makes the target “opaque” - Buck wouldn’t have any knowledge of my app’s build graph so I’d lose many of the benefits it... Source: 11 months ago

• Just: A Command Runner

  Oh excellent, then better (and more portable!) tools are available: http://pants.build https://ninja-build.org https://buck.build and, if you hate yourself: https://bazel.build. - Source: Hacker News / over 1 year ago

• Dev Discussions: Everything You Need to Know about Monorepos with Juri Strumpflohner of Nrwl

  Pioneered by tech giants like Google and Meta with tools like Bazel and Buck, monorepos are seeing widespread adoption across companies of all sizes and industries. - Source: dev.to / almost 2 years ago

• Using URLs for dependency management

  Buck has a http_file() that you can use this way, and it has first-class support for Java. Source: almost 2 years ago

• Is it possible to be an android developer ONLY with the documentation?

  That's a good bridge into saying that we don't use pretty much any standard tooling. Our build system is Buck, we use Mercurial instead of Git, and the IDE of choice seems to be Visual Studio (although Android Studio is supported, with some custom plugins required). Source: about 2 years ago

Less Boring New Tab mentions (0)