On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 17:44:56 GMT, Andy Goryachev <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> it also adds significant overhead [0] and a maintenance burden. >>> >>> [0] https://mill-build.org/blog/1-java-compile.html >> >> It's a marketing page from a competitor from 3 years ago that compares a >> clean build, whereas the advantage of caching build systems is in repetitive >> builds. I'm sure it is faster than Gradle in some scenarios. Those examples >> don't even say if the dependencies were cached in the Gradle cache or >> downloaded as part of the build time (looks like the latter from the >> benchmarks). >> The Eclipse compiler is also faster to work with than javac because it's >> incremental, but a clean compile might show javac being faster. >> >> Still, if you want to use Mill I'm fine with it. I'm sure it's good. What >> does it have to do with `ant`? > > All my builds are clean builds, I had my share of problems stemming from > stale artifacts. > > Do you want to migrate all the build scripts in the project to use gradle? To Nir's point, this isn't an existing build script. There are no build scripts for manual tests and all of our other tests use gradle. Right now, only "apps" use ant, and that's because they are legacy. I wouldn't use that as an argument for expanding the use of ant beyond the apps dir. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/2156#discussion_r4074805849
