The GNU Make Standard Library (GMSL) offers a collection of reusable Makefile functions designed to simplify common build tasks and promote best practices in GNU Make projects. It provides functions for tasks like finding files, managing dependencies, working with directories, handling shell commands, and more. By incorporating GMSL, Makefiles can become more concise, readable, and maintainable, reducing boilerplate and improving consistency across projects. The library is designed to be modular, allowing users to include only the functions they need.
Go's type parameters, introduced in 1.18, allow generic programming but lack the expressiveness of interface constraints found in other languages. Instead of directly specifying the required methods of a type parameter, Go uses interfaces that list concrete types satisfying the desired constraint. This approach, while functional, can be verbose, especially for common constraints like "any integer" or "any ordered type." The constraints package offers pre-defined interfaces for various common use cases, reducing boilerplate and improving code readability. However, creating custom constraints for more complex scenarios still involves defining interfaces with type lists, leading to potential maintenance issues as new types are introduced. The article explores these limitations and proposes potential future directions for Go's type constraints, including the possibility of supporting type sets defined by logical expressions over existing types and interfaces.
Hacker News users generally praised the article for its clear explanation of constraints in Go, particularly for newcomers. Several commenters appreciated the author's approach of starting with an intuitive example before diving into the technical details. Some pointed out the connection between Go's constraints and type classes in Haskell, while others discussed the potential downsides, such as increased compile times and the verbosity of constraint declarations. One commenter suggested exploring alternatives like Go's built-in sort.Interface for simpler cases, and another offered a more concise way to define constraints using type aliases. The practical applications of constraints were also highlighted, particularly in scenarios involving generic data structures and algorithms.
Summary of Comments ( 69 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42945146
Hacker News users discussed the GNU Make Standard Library (GMSL), mostly focusing on its potential usefulness and questioning its necessity. Some commenters appreciated the idea of standardized functions for common Make tasks, finding it could improve readability and reduce boilerplate. Others argued that existing solutions like shell scripts or including Makefiles suffice, viewing GMSL as adding unnecessary complexity. The discussion also touched upon the discoverability of such a library and whether the chosen license (GPLv3) would limit its adoption. Some expressed concern about the potential for GPLv3 to "infect" projects using the library. Finally, a few users pointed out alternatives like using a higher-level build system or other scripting languages to replace Make entirely.
The Hacker News post titled "GNU Make Standard Library" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42945146) has generated several comments discussing the utility and implementation of the library.
One of the most compelling comments highlights the tension between wanting a standardized Make library and the existing diversity of Make implementations. The commenter expresses concern that relying on a specific library might limit the portability of Makefiles, especially given subtle differences in behavior across various Make versions. They suggest that while a standard library could be beneficial, ensuring compatibility across different Make implementations would be crucial for widespread adoption.
Another commenter points out the challenge of implementing a truly portable library due to GNU Make's historical evolution and the resulting inconsistencies in its feature set. They emphasize that features like
guileintegration, though powerful, can further complicate the development of a universal library.The value of the library's functions, such as
abspath, is also discussed. One commenter questions the necessity of such a function, arguing that similar functionality can be achieved through existing Make mechanisms. This sparks a discussion about the readability and maintainability benefits of using library functions, as opposed to relying on potentially more obscure Make syntax.Some commenters express their appreciation for the library, finding it useful and well-designed. They highlight its potential to improve the organization and maintainability of complex Makefiles. The ability to encapsulate common logic into reusable functions is seen as a significant advantage.
The discussion also touches upon alternative approaches, like using shell scripts within Makefiles. While acknowledging the potential of shell scripts, commenters point out that integrating a dedicated Make library offers advantages in terms of consistency and code organization.
Several comments delve into specific technical aspects, like the use of
$(eval ...)and its implications for performance and debugging. Concerns about potential overhead and difficulties in tracing execution flow are raised. Suggestions for alternative implementation strategies are offered.Overall, the comments reflect a mixed reception to the GNU Make Standard Library. While many appreciate the potential benefits of standardized functions and improved code organization, concerns about portability, compatibility with different Make versions, and implementation details are also expressed. The discussion provides valuable insights into the complexities of developing and utilizing a standard library within the GNU Make ecosystem.