Xmake: A cross-platform build utility based on Lua

Xmake: A cross-platform build utility based on Lua(xmake.io)

87 points by phmx 113 days ago | 38 comments

I think a syntax example on the homepage would be a good idea. Also comparison charts for things like cmake, ninja, meson, and bazel. If you have a dependency finding strategy, highlight the pros and cons of that. Basically the only reason states for why I should use this is lua, and that’s not inherently compelling to me for build tooling.

ash-b-dev 109 days ago | |

100%. After going through the documentation, it’s definitely something I’d use, but the homepage presents Lua as the main selling point, and the AI button makes me not want to interact with it at all.

lazypenguin 109 days ago |

A teammate evaluated this and the experience was night and day compared to cmake + vcpkg. However, there wasn’t a lot of motivation to cutover our existing large project over because of the unknown unknowns. I think projects like these looking to dethrone the status quo definitely need some case studies or examples of larger projects using it to increase confidence because I’d much rather use xmake over cmake if it can get the job done

warmwaffles 109 days ago | |

I use it for personal projects and I find it substantially easier to mess around with compiling shaders to SPIRV, processing assets, etc... But some of my gripes are, although it _is_ lua, there is some magic fuckery going on. When you specify targets, things for that target need to be close to the definition, and it feels very odd in a lua language to not have `target("name", function (ctx) ... end)`.

Anyways, not going to die on that hill and I'll keep using it because it's simple and works well for my needs. One thing I do like is that I am not having to constantly keep a skeleton CMake project around to copy paste and setup.

danny0z 109 days ago | | |

> not have `target("name", function (ctx) ... end)`.

It supports this syntax.

https://xmake.io/guide/project-configuration/syntax-descript...

  target("foo", function ()
      set_kind("binary")
      add_files("src/*.cpp")
      add_defines("FOO")
  end)

Rochus 109 days ago |

This is an interesting system that I studied closely a few years ago, along with a few others based on Lua or Python.

What surprises me enormously about all these systems is the fact that, in builds that can become enormously large and complex systems in themselves, we voluntarily forego most of the advantages we have learned over sixty years of software engineering. I am thinking, for example, of strong typing and type checking by the compiler, which then also enables better support from IDEs and analysis or visualization tools.

It's kind of like other scripting languages. For small applications, it all looks practical and efficient, but woe betide it if it becomes as big as Qt or other systems with several hundred thousand lines of code.

einpoklum 109 days ago |

So, digging through the website git repo a bit, some basic facts:

* The project started almost 11 years ago, in 2015.

* It can be both a build-system generator like CMake, or a 'builder' like Make or ninja.

* Code is almost exclusively by one person, waruqi: https://github.com/waruqi , with several other people making a few contribution.

* Prima facie, the API seems to be less flexible/rich than CMake's, but I'm not sure.

* It supports quite a few languages, despite saying "C/C++" on the website.

* It has a built-in REPL.

As @MobiusHorizons points out, a comparison with other build system generators would be appropriate, mostly CMake, but I did not find it.

skavi 109 days ago |

Just yesterday someone was telling me xmake does a lot of what bazel can do (hermetic, deterministic, optionally remote builds) while being easier to use.

I took a look at the docs later and couldn’t find a direct comparison. But there does seem to be a remote build system. And there were a few mentions of sandboxing.

Can anyone provide a head to head comparison?

Does xmake strictly enforce declared dependencies? Do actions run in their own sandboxes?

Can you define a target whose dependency tree is multi language, multi toolchain, multi target platform and which is built across multiple remote execution servers?

rienbdj 109 days ago |

Can anyone explain xmake in terms of Build Systems a la Carte?

richrichardsson 109 days ago |

I apologise for this:

What's wrong with premake which is also Lua based?

when I meant:

What advantage does this have over premake which is also Lua based?

fsw 109 days ago | |

For one, the last official stable release of premake is from 2010.

rienbdj 109 days ago | |

What’s wrong with xmake which is also Lua based?

gjvc 109 days ago | | |

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46511599 similar reasoning

wsve 109 days ago |

At my work we use MSBuild and vcpkg. What would a transition from that to XMake be like?

janjones 109 days ago | |

Then you are already using XMake (albeit a different one than OP), it's the original codename for MSBuild, still present in the code: https://github.com/dotnet/msbuild/blob/main/src/MSBuild/XMak... :)

debugnik 109 days ago | | |

Your phrasing could confuse readers: MSBuild happened to historically have XMake as a codename but is entirely unrelated to the build system known as XMake.

pjmlp 109 days ago | |

As far as I am aware, there no integrations available with Visual Studio, and not sure about C++20 modules and import std support.

danny0z 109 days ago | | |

It can generate a Visual Studio project, then use the xmake CLI to integrate and compile the project, and supports debugging and IntelliSense.

https://xmake.io/guide/extensions/builtin-plugins.html#gener...

C++ Modules examples:

https://xmake.io/examples/cpp/cxx-modules.html

https://github.com/xmake-io/xmake/tree/dev/tests/projects/c%...

ziotom78 109 days ago | | |

A few weeks ago I decided to test C++ modules, but I had a hard time to figure out how to make them accepted by CMake. After a few days of struggle with `set(CMAKE_EXPERIMENTAL_CXX_IMPORT_STD "d0edc3af-4c50-42ea-a356-e2862fe7a444")` (it was so hard to find the right UUID that worked with my version) and errors on `import std;`, I decided to give XMake a chance.

It took just a couple of minutes to have a working example that fully supported C++ modules and `import std`:

    set_languages("c++23")

    add_rules("mode.debug", "mode.release")

    target("mytest")
        set_kind("static")
        add_files("src/*.cpp")
        add_files("src/*.cppm", {public = true})
        set_policy("build.c++.modules", true)

IshKebab 109 days ago |

My work uses this and it's slooooooow. Would not recommend.

elitepleb 109 days ago | |

the command file generator is usually last to blame for a slow compile, making it output a cmake/ninja/make project would not speed up a poorly structured compilation tree at all

junon 109 days ago | | |

I don't believe xmake is a command file generator, is it?

willaaaaaaa 109 days ago | |

is that so? my experience's quite good

warmwaffles 109 days ago | | |

It's fast. I don't know if they are conflating the actual compiler being slow with xmake executing it.

mrlonglong 109 days ago |

https://xkcd.com/927/

We have so many build utilities out there.

rhet0rica 109 days ago |

I am deeply distressed that this doesn't require Xlib.

nvlled 109 days ago | |

Why? I'm so confused why would you expect a build tool to depend on a x11 client library, besides the fact that both starts with the letter x. Does it also upset you that xamarin and xaml has nothing to do with xlib, xmake, or to each other?

set_languages("c++23") add_rules("mode.debug", "mode.release") target("mytest") set_kind("static") add_files("src/*.cpp") add_files("src/*.cppm", {public = true}) set_policy("build.c++.modules", true)