Based on our record, Meson should be more popular than Buck. It has been mentiond 43 times since March 2021. We are tracking product recommendations and mentions on various public social media platforms and blogs. They can help you identify which product is more popular and what people think of it.
I went to mesonbuild.org and it doesn't match the description (some sort of betting site? I didn't stick around ...), and a search turned up: https://mesonbuild.com/. - Source: Hacker News / 6 months ago
Came here to post the same. The answer for How to build software? is Meson[1] for C and C++ and also other languages. Works well on Windows and Mac, too. I’ve written a small Makefile to learn the basic and backgrounds. Make is fine. But the next high-level would have been Autotools, which is an intimidating and weird set of tools. Most new stuff written in C/C++ use now Meson and it feels sane. [1]... - Source: Hacker News / 7 months ago
If you are very fortunate, you'll be able to choose something else. I like meson myself: it looks a bit like python, it's popular, small, simple, well-documented, easy to install and update, and it works well everywhere. Source: 8 months ago
I suggest changing the build tool. Meson improved C and C++ a lot: https://mesonbuild.com/ The dependency declaration and auto-detection is nice. But the hidden extra is WrapDB, built-in package management (if wanted):- Source: Hacker News / 8 months agohttps://mesonbuild.com/Wrap-dependency-system-manual.html.
> C's only REAL problem (in my opinion) which is the lack of dependency management. Most everything else can be done with a makefile and a half decent editor. Care to hear about our lord and saviour Meson? Both of your quoted problems are mutually incompatible: dependency management isn't the job of the compiler, it's a job for the build or host system. If you want to keep writing makefiles, be prepared to write... - Source: Hacker News / 9 months ago
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
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
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
Buck has a http_file() that you can use this way, and it has first-class support for Java. Source: almost 2 years ago
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
Ninja Build - Ninja is a small build system with a focus on speed.
GNU Make - GNU Make is a tool which controls the generation of executables and other non-source files of a program from the program's source files.
CMake - CMake is an open-source, cross-platform family of tools designed to build, test and package software.
SCons - SCons is an Open Source software construction tool—that is, a next-generation build tool.
Apache Maven - Apache Maven is a project comprehension and management software tool.
MakeMe - Building Software Made Simple