Can i have input for creating a Build Tool?

Question

I'm a student and i want make a build tool as a side project for myself because none of the current build tools seem to attract me. There's ant, but i really dislike looking at XML (i don't know why, but i really don't see the appeal of tags; it puts me off visually and cannot be made neat in my eyes). There's maven, but i really don't want to be working on a project just to have it fail all of a sudden (this is based on the research I've done where people say that there are times that maven fails to build all of a sudden. This could just be total BS but i'd rather not find out the hard way), plus there's some XML involved. I really liked make, but it isn't portable, and even though the chances of me using a non-Windows PC are next to nil, I am unfortunately, a computer science student who has been properly trained to always assume the worst case.

Currently, i am looking into Gradle. I'm still trying to figure it out (i am a really slow learner) but i like the syntax. It might also be beneficial to note that i am so shallow that i don't really care about the back end stuff or any of the advanced features cause i don't really understand dependency management and stuff just quite yet. All i care about is that the configuration syntax or make file looks clean, that it works without requiring internet access, absolute paths, or anything of the sort, and that it works consistently and doesn't take too long. I believe that the syntax is important because, like all code, if it looks ugly, you won't want to read it.

I want to make a build tool that is simple, functional, and portable (i'm gonna be running it off my External HDD with Java in it). I'd really appreciate any suggestions this community has to offer, such as "It really is better to just stick with ant or maven cause they work already" or "be sure to avoid make's dependency issue". This will just be a side project so i can work on my Java and maybe learn something new so even if i fail, i still might learn something new so no need to comment on that.

Answer 1

Why would using Maven mean that your build fails "all of a sudden"?

I would advocate always using continuous integration (e.g. cruise control for ant or Hudson for maven) regardless of the build tool you use. This should eliminate a build failing "all of a sudden"

Answer 2

Here's just an idea:

ant is really not such a bad tool. Maybe you could consider building a front end for it that translates a DSL (Domain Specific Language) of your own design into ant's XML, and hide the XML from your tool's users?

---

You may also want to take a look at Rake. Someone recently ranted in his blog about how terrible Maven is (and the debate goes on) and he much, much prefers Rake.

Answer 3

There's maven, but i really don't want to be working on a project just to have it fail all of a sudden.

What does that mean?

Anyway, if you're into Groovy, I recommend Gant.

Answer 4

Cobbling together your own build tool doesn't sound like a great use of your time, especially when established tools such as ant and maven exist and have such vast user bases that are finding (and fixing) bugs with those tools.

I don't understand your comment about maven causing build failure all of a sudden.

Answer 5

Hi

Another existing tool you might choose to ignore is SCons. It's written in Python and has some very nice features including, possibly relevant to you, easy extensibility.

And yes, I think you are going to crash and burn. Far better to learn one of the existing tools properly than to reinvent this particular wheel. Use your creative urges and time to write something truly new.

Furthermore, and since you are a student allow me to stand on my soap-box: one of the lessons that new entrants to the IT profession have to learn is to use the tools you are given, not to expect to be allowed the time and money to develop a new one. Don't expect to be able to rock up to work on day one and try to make a case for writing 'MyMake' because GNU Make (or whatever) doesn't float your boat.

Cheers

Mark

Answer 6

I started one, some 7 years ago. I am still using it. No one else uses it. http://gna.org/projects/maker/

I started on some same ground than you: multi platform (was Linux, DEC Alpha, and Windows at the time) with a new shiny lanquage: Python. I was getting ideas from Miller's Recursive Make Considered Harmful in the sense that I had a source file for each executable (same for shared library, or static library) that was listing the C/C++ source files, and dependencies on other libraries. The main feature was to generate on the fly a makefile that is fed into gmake (that does a perfect job, provided it has a perfect makefile) to build all the binaries in one call, managing all the dependencies (with gcc -MD options).

Over time. it evolved mostly into a tool that can use Visual Studio C++ project and solution files to compile on Linux. And I am struggling to keep it up-to-date with new versions of Visual, and new values of project parameters and project properties that my coworkers use.

I wouldn't recommend starting a new tool.

Answer 7

If you haven't already tried it, try Automated Build Studio. We have used if for a couple of years now and it works fine for us.

Answer 8

XML will haunt you everywhere you go. Invest in an excellent XML visualizer / editor, and go to town with Ant anyhow!