[llvm-dev] Contributing Bazel BUILD files similar to gn

[David Blaikie via llvm-dev]

On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 12:41 PM Stefan Teleman <stefan.teleman at gmail.com>
wrote:

> > This is a fairly unhelpful email - clearly folks using Bazel derive some
> benefit/have chosen some tradeoff compared to CMake. Doesn't have to be the
> thing you want, but it's pretty unhelpful to dismiss/diminish the needs of
> others like this.
>
> I did not see a rationale for the Bazel proposal, outlining its
> benefits over CMake.
>
> Speaking with direct experience with Bazel - Tensorflow - I cannot
> think of a single reason why it would/should be considered "better"
> over the current CMake.
>
> Everyone has their own favorite build system. That is nice, but it is
> not enough of a reason to propose adding it.
>
> I would also like to become informed as to what particular
> needs/shortcomings/defects are addressed by Bazel, that are lacking in
> / cannot be addressed by CMake.
>

I expect most of it is probably a statement free of value judgments: Some
other projects chose to use it/some folks have to use it for other reasons,
clearly there's enough use that it's motivated folks to have/maintain Bazel
builds for LLVM for years. Rather than judging their choices as
bad/lesser/wrong - might be useful to accept that some folks had their
reasons and they're trying to make the most of the situation. I don't think
anyone's making an argument that LLVM should switch to Bazel/that that
would be better than the CMake we're using, and I think it's helpful to
return the favor and not suggest that other projects would be better off
switching to CMake over Bazel - they no doubt have their reasons.

- Dave


>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Stefan Teleman
> stefan.teleman at gmail.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20201029/97f9a935/attachment.html>