Kamil Cholewiński <harry6...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think it might have been possible to use some other build tool to > > achieve something similar, but I don't think it would have worked out > > as well. > > http://gittup.org/tup/ ?
I did a benchmark against tup, make, mk, ninja back then. What I learn: - make is the fastest - ninja needs to be run twice - tup is slowest (probably didn't use monitor) but easy to write - mk is slightly slower than make Still gnumake is the most used, fast as well. I see tup as a good build system but not used by many.
