I'd make the counter-argument: mix is a build *tool*, but not your build; that's something you should define for your project.
In pretty much all of my projects, I find myself writing a `mix build` alias, as a high-level one-stop-shop command, but it looks very different for each project—my Bakeware CLI application builds look very different from my phoenix umbrella web application build with a custom auto-asset-vendoring pipeline. Perhaps simply having `mix new` create a default alias for `mix build` would work here? I'm very against prescribing what it means to build a project, but this approach would encourage a common idiom across mix projects as well as giving developers a jumping-off-point for when their build's complexity grows. On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 9:08:55 AM UTC-5 Jonathan Arnett wrote: > When I first clone an Elixir repository, usually the first thing I do is > run `mix do deps.get, compile`. It gets the job done, but it's a bit > verbose. Build tools in other languages (e.g. Rust's cargo, Haskell's > stack, Gleam's gleam) have a "build" command that both pulls dependencies > *and* compiles the app. The proposed "build" command for mix would > functionally be the same running `mix do deps.get, compile`, just in a > smaller package. > > I realize that I can make such an alias in my own projects, and I have, > but I wonder if this would be useful for the larger Elixir community. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elixir-lang-core" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to elixir-lang-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/85899dc5-6494-4d6b-b6b7-d074b8823c31n%40googlegroups.com.
