undefined | Better HN

0 pointsen4bz3y ago0 comments

It's literally the default. How can the default be an anti-pattern. I doubt you're using C/C++ because you don't seem to understand the issue.

0 comments

lopkeny12ko3y ago

Learn to take others seriously without asking for credentials. Whether or not I use C/C++ is irrelevant. Bazel is flexible, and you can use it however you want, correctly or incorrectly. The principles I've mentioned above are language-agnostic, and are recommended best practice regardless of whatever programming language you are building.

https://bazel.build/basics/hermeticity

> When given the same input source code and product configuration, a hermetic build system always returns the same output by isolating the build from changes to the host system.

> In order to isolate the build, hermetic builds are insensitive to libraries and other software installed on the local or remote host machine. They depend on specific versions of build tools, such as compilers, and dependencies, such as libraries. This makes the build process self-contained as it doesn't rely on services external to the build environment.

My overarching point is, you should fix your build rather than point blame to the tool's authors because you're using it in an unsupported way.

joshuamorton3y ago

Many people believe that the "traditional" way of building C/C++ applications is an antipattern. Such a belief is, in fact, a core reason to adopt bazel. If you don't believe that, then bazel may not be for you. It is intentionally opinionated in a way that you aren't.

en4bzOP3y ago

I'm assuming you're referring to the golang model of statically linking everything. That's not really doable when many popular libraries are (L)GPL'd like glibc and libstdc++. It also doesn't work if you want to provide a shared library and need to be compatible with every possible system. That's not my opinion it's just a deficiency of bazel.

tadfisher3y ago

Then you build the lowest-supported-version of GCC and glibc, use that as your toolchain in Bazel, and build a dynamic shared library as normal. Using a system-provided toolchain also works, but you have to build on that system using something like Docker, which is certainly an alternative to Bazel but isn't quite meant to serve the same niche.

tadfisher3y ago

Non-hermetic is non-reproducible. I can only produce the same build outputs as you if I use the same toolchain, which essentially implies I must run the same OS and patch level, among a host of smaller impurities that can change the output of a build.

Sometimes this is desirable; for example, if you are packaging for a Linux distribution. But that's not the use case Bazel was invented to serve.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

lopkeny12ko3y ago

https://bazel.build/basics/hermeticity

> When given the same input source code and product configuration, a hermetic build system always returns the same output by isolating the build from changes to the host system.

My overarching point is, you should fix your build rather than point blame to the tool's authors because you're using it in an unsupported way.

joshuamorton3y ago

en4bzOP3y ago

tadfisher3y ago

Sometimes this is desirable; for example, if you are packaging for a Linux distribution. But that's not the use case Bazel was invented to serve.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse