Can zig-build-system be an alternative to the gnu-build-system?

Can zig-build-system be an alternative to the gnu-build-system?

[jgart]

Can `zig-build-system` be an alternative to the `gnu-build-system`? 

https://ziglang.org/learn/why\_zig\_rust\_d\_cpp/#a-package-manager-and-build-system-for-existing-projects

> Not only can you write Zig code instead of C or C++ code, but you can use Zig as a replacement for autotools, cmake, make, scons, ninja, etc. And on top of this, it (will) provide a package manager for native dependencies. This build system is intended to be appropriate even if the entirety of a project’s codebase is in C or C++.

WDYT

Re: Can zig-build-system be an alternative to the gnu-build-system?

[Pjotr Prins]

Hi jgart,

zig as a build system is nice, but it is llvm bound and only targets
zig and C/C++. It does not handle packages, and that is a feature in
my book ;). Mind they are planning to go down the packaging route,
from what I can tell.

There have been some older discussions about creating our own
replacement for autotools, cmake and others. I often fight these make
make systems - and meson and/or language specific build systems. It is
a time waster for programmers and none of these systems leverages the
power of Guix itself. I kinda settled for cmake because, even though
it is an effing dragon, at least I can make it work (pun intended).

We need someone with deep experience in build systems to write a guile
replacement - generating ninja is one idea. That is my opinion :). I
would love a simple way to describe a project in guile. It should not
be too hard actually (famously that is how these projects start and
turn out to be a real time sink). Maybe someone wants to try with
guidance from us, or maybe we can do it when we get bored some day.

Pj.

On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 02:03:06AM +0000, jgart wrote:
> Can `zig-build-system` be an alternative to the `gnu-build-system`? 
> 
> https://ziglang.org/learn/why\_zig\_rust\_d\_cpp/#a-package-manager-and-build-system-for-existing-projects
> 
> > Not only can you write Zig code instead of C or C++ code, but you can use Zig as a replacement for autotools, cmake, make, scons, ninja, etc. And on top of this, it (will) provide a package manager for native dependencies. This build system is intended to be appropriate even if the entirety of a project’s codebase is in C or C++.
> 
> WDYT
> 

Re: Can zig-build-system be an alternative to the gnu-build-system?

[Ekaitz Zarraga]

Hi

> Can `zig-build-system` be an alternative to the `gnu-build-system`?

It could be, but in order to do that we need to add the zig-build-system:

https://issues.guix.gnu.org/60889

:)

Re: Can zig-build-system be an alternative to the gnu-build-system?

[Blake Shaw]

This has reminded me of Make's built-in support for guile[1].

I've assumed that the fact that we don't use it means that it
probably depends on an earlier guile, as many projects many
that support "guile scripting" typically depend on ~v1.8; but
that is just an assumption.

Does anyone know what its status is?

[1] https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/html_node/Guile-Integration.html

Pjotr Prins <pjotr.public12@thebird.nl> writes:

> Hi jgart,
>
> zig as a build system is nice, but it is llvm bound and only targets
> zig and C/C++. It does not handle packages, and that is a feature in
> my book ;). Mind they are planning to go down the packaging route,
> from what I can tell.
>
> There have been some older discussions about creating our own
> replacement for autotools, cmake and others. I often fight these make
> make systems - and meson and/or language specific build systems. It is
> a time waster for programmers and none of these systems leverages the
> power of Guix itself. I kinda settled for cmake because, even though
> it is an effing dragon, at least I can make it work (pun intended).
>
> We need someone with deep experience in build systems to write a guile
> replacement - generating ninja is one idea. That is my opinion :). I
> would love a simple way to describe a project in guile. It should not
> be too hard actually (famously that is how these projects start and
> turn out to be a real time sink). Maybe someone wants to try with
> guidance from us, or maybe we can do it when we get bored some day.
>
> Pj.
>
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 02:03:06AM +0000, jgart wrote:
>> Can `zig-build-system` be an alternative to the `gnu-build-system`? 
>> 
>> https://ziglang.org/learn/why\_zig\_rust\_d\_cpp/#a-package-manager-and-build-system-for-existing-projects
>> 
>> > Not only can you write Zig code instead of C or C++ code, but you
>> can use Zig as a replacement for autotools, cmake, make, scons,
>> ninja, etc. And on top of this, it (will) provide a package manager
>> for native dependencies. This build system is intended to be
>> appropriate even if the entirety of a project’s codebase is in C or
>> C++.
>> 
>> WDYT
>> 

Re: Can zig-build-system be an alternative to the gnu-build-system?

[jgart]

hola Ekaitz,

I added it as a pre-release to Guix 'R Us a few weeks ago:

https://toys.whereis.みんな/symbols?search=zig-build-system

;()

Re: Can zig-build-system be an alternative to the gnu-build-system?

[Ekaitz Zarraga]

Gracias!

------- Original Message -------
On Wednesday, February 1st, 2023 at 3:45 PM, jgart <jgart@dismail.de> wrote:


> hola Ekaitz,
> 
> I added it as a pre-release to Guix 'R Us a few weeks ago:
> 
> https://toys.whereis.みんな/symbols?search=zig-build-system
> 
> ;()

Re: Can zig-build-system be an alternative to the gnu-build-system?

[jgart]

De nada, vas a estar en dias de los guixeros in brussels?

Re: Can zig-build-system be an alternative to the gnu-build-system?

[Nathan Dehnel]

Would this Guixy build system store build artifacts in /gnu/store?
This could allow, for example, reproducible incremental builds.

Re: Can zig-build-system be an alternative to the gnu-build-system?

[Philip McGrath]

Hi Pjotr,

On Wed, Feb 1, 2023, at 5:11 AM, Pjotr Prins wrote:
>
> There have been some older discussions about creating our own
> replacement for autotools, cmake and others. I often fight these make
> make systems - and meson and/or language specific build systems. It is
> a time waster for programmers and none of these systems leverages the
> power of Guix itself. I kinda settled for cmake because, even though
> it is an effing dragon, at least I can make it work (pun intended).
>
> We need someone with deep experience in build systems to write a guile
> replacement - generating ninja is one idea. That is my opinion :). I
> would love a simple way to describe a project in guile. It should not
> be too hard actually (famously that is how these projects start and
> turn out to be a real time sink). Maybe someone wants to try with
> guidance from us, or maybe we can do it when we get bored some day.
>

You might be interested in Zuo, which was created to replace the work of `make` in the build system for Racket and Racket's branch of Chez Scheme. (The name comes from a Chinese word for "make".) It's packaged for Guix: https://packages.guix.gnu.org/packages/zuo/

The documentation is at: https://docs.racket-lang.org/zuo/

One important aspect is that the primary implementation is *not* in Racket or Guile: a single C source file implements the tiny Scheme-like language, and most of the functionality is implemented in the Zuo language. This simplifies bootstrapping, and it also means that, if your project already needs a C compiler, you can add Zuo without adding a build dependency on another scripting language. (On unfriendly systems like Windows, even requiring Python can be a significant complication.)

By design, Zuo does not try to replace the `configure` part of your build system: Racket uses Autoconf, and Chez has its own custom `configure` script. Similarly, it works well to have a stub Makefile that just runs Zuo, and Zuo even cooperates with the GNU Make jobserver. When Racket adopted Zuo, almost all make-based workflows continued to work unchanged.

The build system part of Zuo is modeled on Shake (used by GHC). The paper "Build Systems à la Carte" is a nice overview of the design space: https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3236774

The thread about replacing Racket's build scripts is here: https://github.com/racket/racket/pull/4179

-Philip

zuo build system; formerly: Can zig-build-system be an alternative to the gnu-build-system?

[Pjotr Prins]

On Thu, Feb 02, 2023 at 12:52:28PM -0500, Philip McGrath wrote:
> You might be interested in Zuo, which was created to replace the work of `make` in the build system for Racket and Racket's branch of Chez Scheme. (The name comes from a Chinese word for "make".) It's packaged for Guix: https://packages.guix.gnu.org/packages/zuo/
> 
> The documentation is at: https://docs.racket-lang.org/zuo/

Thank you. This looks very interesting to me. Next project I start I
think I'll try this.

Pj.