A lot of my work, these days, focuses on figuring out how to improve how people develop software in ways that reduces the amount of time developers have to spend doing work outside of development and that improves the quality of their work. This post, has been sitting in my drafts folder for the last year, and does a good job of explaining how I locate my work **and* makes a case for high quality generic build system tooling that I continue to feel is compelling.*
Incidentally, it turns out that I wrote an introductory post about buildsystems 6 years ago. Go past me.
Canonically, build systems described the steps required to produce artifacts, as system (graph) of dependencies  and these dependencies are between source files (code) and artifacts (programs and packages) with intermediate artifacts all in terms of the files they are or create. Though different development environments, programming languages, and kinds of software have different.
While the canonical "build systems are about producing files," the truth is that the challenge of contemporary _software_ development isn't really just about producing files. Everything from test automation to deployment is something that we can think about as a kind of build system problem.
Let's unwind for a moment. The work of "making software," breaks down into a collection of--reasonably disparate--tasks, which include:
- collecting requirements (figuring out what people want,)
- project planning (figuring out how to break larger collections of functionality into more reasonable units.)
- writing new code in existing code bases.
- exploring unfamiliar code and making changes.
- writing tests for code you've recently written, or areas of the code base that have recently chaining.
- rewriting existing code with functionally equivalent code (refactoring,)
- fixing bugs discovered by users.
- fixing bugs discovered by an automated test suite.
- releasing software (deploying code.)
Within these tasks developers do a lot of little experiments and tests. Make a change, see what it's impact is by doing something like compiling the code, running the program or running a test program. The goal, therefore, of the project of developer productivity projects is to automate these processes and shorten the time it takes to do any of these tasks. In particular the feedback loop between "making a change" and seeing if that change had an impact. The more complex the system that you're developing, with regards to distinct components, dependencies, target platforms, compilation model, and integration's, them the more time you spend in any one of these loops and the less productive you can be.
Build systems are uniquely positioned to suport the development process: they're typically purpose built per-project (sharing common infrastructure,) most projects already have one, and they provide an ideal environment to provide the kind of incremental development of additional functionality and tooling. The model of build systems: the description of processes in terms of dependency graphs and the optimization for local environments means.
The problem, I think, is that build systems tend to be pretty terrible, or at least many suffer a number of classic flaws:
- implicit assumptions about the build or development environment which make it difficult to start using.
- unexpressed dependencies on services or systems that the build requires to be running in a certain configuration.
- improperly configured dependency graphs which end up requiring repeated work.
- incomplete expression of dependencies which require users to manually complete operations in particular orders.
- poorly configured defaults which make for overly complex invocations for common tasks.
- operations distributed among a collection of tools with little integration so that compilation, test automation, release automation, and other functions.
By improving the quality, correctness, and usability of build systems, we:
- improve the experience for developers every day,
- make it really easy to optimize basically every aspect of the development process,
- reduce the friction for including new developers in a project's development process.
I'm not saying "we need to spend more time writing build automation tools" (like make, ninja, cmake, and friends,) or that the existing ones are bad and hard to use (they, by and large are,) but that they're the first and best hook we have into developer workflows. A high quality, trustable, tested, and easy to use build system for a project make development easier, continuous integration easy and maintainable, and ultimately improve the ability of developers to spend more of their time focusing on important problems.
|||ideally build systems describe directed acylcic graph, though many projects have buildsystems with cyclic dependency graphs that they ignore in some way.|