On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Ingwie Phoenix <[email protected]> wrote:
> I actually always wondered: We have a scripting engine. Why do we rely on > Python for GYP, if we have NodeJS? Is there no gyp replacement in node > itself? Its something that I just never understood... Since the only people > that build from source will very likely have python installed, knowing that > they will need GYP. Build tools are (generally) less interesting than building servers, which is why there are no GYP replacements in in JS. Big reasons why chromium/v8/nodejs changed from scons to gyp was 1) parallel builds (gyp can create makefiles which have -jX capability), 2) portability (mobile/arm/mips/non-x86 targets were becoming more important at the time of the switch) 3) scons was slow. The GN FAQ page seems to indicate part of the driver to GN is for CI improvements [1]. At least it looks like someone at Google has done some more planning this time as was not the case with the scons->gyp transition. Personally, I prefer the suckless approach to building software ( config.mk/Makefile)[2][3]. Keeps people out of autotools/automake hell and let's you focus on writing software. [1] https://code.google.com/p/chromium/wiki/GNFaq [2] http://git.suckless.org/surf/tree/config.mk [3] http://git.suckless.org/surf/tree/Makefile -- Job board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ New group rules: https://gist.github.com/othiym23/9886289#file-moderation-policy-md Old group rules: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nodejs" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/nodejs/CAB9Rao_f2yPj_iXkafDTpeVQ-AcgSjt_UgrjJrLxf1OLUoPt_Q%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
