In my case, I was entirely unaware of Shake's existence. The no-nonsense support for file oriented workflows is the most compelling feature of Makefiles for me.
In that regard, Shake seems really compelling. It supports the file oriented nature of my build system. It's backed by an actual programming language, with lexical scoping, functions, a module system... all the things that suck about Makefiles.
Most importantly, it solves the one thing that drives me up the wall with Makefiles: supporting custom command line arguments sanely. I detest typing `make web TARGET=prod` and `shakeArgsWith` seems like it provides the flexibility of specifying targets and flags from custom command line arguments.
Thanks for this, I'm going to try and convert a few non trivial Makefiles to Shake. Any cons I should be aware of?
In that regard, Shake seems really compelling. It supports the file oriented nature of my build system. It's backed by an actual programming language, with lexical scoping, functions, a module system... all the things that suck about Makefiles.
Most importantly, it solves the one thing that drives me up the wall with Makefiles: supporting custom command line arguments sanely. I detest typing `make web TARGET=prod` and `shakeArgsWith` seems like it provides the flexibility of specifying targets and flags from custom command line arguments.
Thanks for this, I'm going to try and convert a few non trivial Makefiles to Shake. Any cons I should be aware of?