Re: [PROPOSAL] Builder, a build system integration for Emacs

[Jim Porter <jporterbugs@gmail.com>]

On 5/21/2023 12:33 PM, Augustin Chéneau (BTuin) wrote:
> Interestingly I already thought about chaining build systems, but I 
> wasn't sure how to implement it.
> Unfortunately the main drawback of your method is that you can't easily 
> switch between a debug or release mode (if I understood your code 
> correctly).

Well, the main reason for that is that I just haven't implemented that 
yet, since I'd want to go well beyond just a debug/release toggle. For 
example, this feature could probably be useful for configuring *any* 
kind of build variant, including things like cross-compilation. I 
haven't figured out a sufficiently-generic way to handle that across 
many build systems though.

Currently, the way I tend to use taco is just to let it give me an 
appropriate template for the compile command, which I hand-edit. For the 
configuration step, I often add some extra options, but I only need to 
do that when I'm setting up a build; for actually compiling a project, 
the default is usually what I want.

> Also, what if an intermediate step is used in two different context, 
> both with different next step?

I think that should be fine. For example, CMake can generate Makefile or 
Ninja files, depending on what flags you pass. Once it does that, it 
should be easy to see what the next step is retrospectively by looking 
at the files in your build dir.

(This could get a bit trickier for something like meson, which seems to 
want you to use its own `meson compile` wrapper, even though it uses 
Ninja as the default build backend. But in that case, I think you'd just 
need to scan for an appropriate sentinel file for meson in the build 
dir, and then have the "meson compile step" be higher priority than the 
generic "Ninja compile step".)

> I thought of something with a list of targets names, but I'll need to 
> think more deeply.
> Currently you could achieve the same manually, but I agree it's not very 
> convenient.

This is something I've thought a bit about too: right now, taco is only 
good for compiling a project, but it doesn't help for things like 
running unit tests, building HTML documentation, etc. That will take 
some careful thought though, since some build systems let you define 
arbitrary build targets for things like this, and others treat targets 
specially. For example, `make test` is just a normal Make target like 
any other, but `meson test` is (somewhat) special; I could call my Make 
"test" target anything I like (e.g. "check"), but I don't think meson is 
so flexible.

Another lower-level option for targets is to take advantage of Emacs' 
built-in Pcomplete code. Pcomplete can handle completing command-line 
arguments for lots of commands, and if you added some Pcomplete handlers 
for "make" that let you tab-complete Make targets, then you could 
probably use that in Builder (or taco) as well. This has the additional 
benefit that you get nice tab-completion in M-x shell too.