7 ms·

Show HN: Task – A simple build tool written in Go

alain_gilbert 8y ago
Oh wow, I didn't tried it yet, but reading the doc, it looks exactly how I imagine the perfect "make"/"task runner" should work. "make" frustrated me so many times. I'll definitely try "task".
- FeatureIncomple 8y ago
  Thanks for these words! Although I don't think this tool is perfect, I created Task exactly due my frustration with Make and the lack of decent alternatives. Let me know if you any feedback after you try it.
  - alain_gilbert 8y ago
    After giving a quick look, my tasks are twice faster with make. So I was curious to know why and I tried to clone the project to debug it, and could not figure out how to setup the dependencies properly. You should add a section how to contribute/develop.
    - FeatureIncomple 8y ago
      Yeah, a contributing guide would be nice. Thanks for the suggestion. I'm curious on why Make runs twice faster to you, since in most cases the difference should be negligible (i.e. the Task overhead should be insignificant compared to the time it takes to run the command). Maybe you're running really lightweight, like `cp`? Otherwise I'd consider it a bug. Could you open an issue, then?
- freedomben 8y ago
  This project does look cool, I'll probably give it a whirl too. If you're open to ruby, rake is an awesome and powerful tool that is a ruby DSL implementation of make. Learning rake was one of the best investments I made. Even tho I'm a polyglot these days, I still often use rake, even tho it does make some golang people vomit :-) https://github.com/ruby/rake https://github.com/ruby/rake
  - FeatureIncomple 8y ago
    > I still often use rake, even tho it does make some golang people vomit LOL. I love both Go and Ruby. Each of them shines on different scenarios.
- nine_k 8y ago
  Take a look at Tup, too. http://gittup.org/tup/ http://gittup.org/tup/
BlackLotus89 8y ago
Meh I hate generic names like this, especially if they are taken already. For instance taskwarrior uses the task binary as well. Have to take a look at it nonetheless https://taskwarrior.org/ https://taskwarrior.org/
- rovr138 8y ago
  The name was throwing me off. Thought it was relating to TaskWarrior at first.
eknkc 8y ago
I’ve been using Task on multiple projects for a couple of months now. Initially I whated to be able to easily create some deployment config files using it’s templating features. Worked great. Now I just default to task instead of make on new stuff.
ianwalter 8y ago
Used this for a project about a year ago and it was great. There was room for improvement, but it did what we needed it to do without any fuss.
fourseventy 8y ago
I've been putting off setting up a makefile for my project. I'll give this a go
cmcginty 8y ago
Please forgive me, but how is this easier to use than make? I see a lot of these "reimplement tool X in language Y" projects, but what is the point if it's not actually solving the problem better. Just looking at the link it seems to resemble Ant which also started with similar design goals.
- TeddyDD 8y ago
  I'm not sure about task but I use Just [1] - it's similar program. It's nice way to collect commands you often run in given project. Make is build system, with strong focus on building C program. It has clunky syntax and many quirks. Just is just taks runner ;) [1]: https://github.com/casey/just https://github.com/casey/just
swalladge 8y ago
> you just need to describe your build tasks using a simple YAML schema I don't understand this. How is it easier/nicer to learn an arbitrary schema in an ambiguous[1] data serialization language than the makefile syntax which was designed specifically for the purpose? I'm not criticising the project; I'm sure a lot of work has gone into it and it is decent software. But I wouldn't encourage people to be quick to disregard 'difficult' mature software and jump at something new that makes claims about being 'simple and easy'. [1]: https://github.com/cblp/yaml-sucks/ https://github.com/cblp/yaml-sucks/
- dis-sys 8y ago
  > the makefile syntax which was designed specifically for the purpose? and proven by generations of programmers. the (very sad) problem here is that for some people makefile is not trendy, it is something first released 42 years ago.
  - snarfy 8y ago
    As someone who's been using makefiles for about 30 of those years, I have to say make sucks. It's barely evolved at all. There is a reason there are so many alternatives to it, and it's not be because it's trendy. I mean, you can't even copy a file with it. That takes an external program.
    - convolvatron 8y ago
      it does. unfortunately its still the one i reach for because it never seems like a good time to research alternatives. generally the tools that are optimized to make the common case easy aren't so useful to me because i often have alot of intermediate build artifacts/stages. and i really like the declarative nature of make..just not all the fragility and warts. does anyone have any suggestions for a nice general declarative alternative?
      - FeatureIncomple 8y ago
        > I often have a lot of intermediate build artifacts/stages I don't know your use case in depth, but I don't see why Task wouldn't work for you, since it's similar to Make in this regard. You can have multiple tasks (for each step) and then either set dependencies or have a task that call all other tasks in the right sequence. And, of course, you'd have to enable [this](https://taskfile.org/#/usage?id=prevent-unnecessary-work https://taskfile.org/#/usage?id=prevent-unnecessary-work). Anyway, seems that Make is already enough for you, since you're used to it's quirks.
IshKebab 8y ago
YAML is a terrible choice.

Oh wow, I didn't tried it yet, but reading the doc, it looks exactly how I imagine the perfect "make"/"task runner" should work. "make" frustrated me so many times. I'll definitely try "task".

FeatureIncomple 8y ago
Thanks for these words! Although I don't think this tool is perfect, I created Task exactly due my frustration with Make and the lack of decent alternatives. Let me know if you any feedback after you try it.
- alain_gilbert 8y ago
  After giving a quick look, my tasks are twice faster with make. So I was curious to know why and I tried to clone the project to debug it, and could not figure out how to setup the dependencies properly. You should add a section how to contribute/develop.
  - FeatureIncomple 8y ago
    Yeah, a contributing guide would be nice. Thanks for the suggestion. I'm curious on why Make runs twice faster to you, since in most cases the difference should be negligible (i.e. the Task overhead should be insignificant compared to the time it takes to run the command). Maybe you're running really lightweight, like `cp`? Otherwise I'd consider it a bug. Could you open an issue, then?
freedomben 8y ago
This project does look cool, I'll probably give it a whirl too. If you're open to ruby, rake is an awesome and powerful tool that is a ruby DSL implementation of make. Learning rake was one of the best investments I made. Even tho I'm a polyglot these days, I still often use rake, even tho it does make some golang people vomit :-) https://github.com/ruby/rake https://github.com/ruby/rake
- FeatureIncomple 8y ago
  > I still often use rake, even tho it does make some golang people vomit LOL. I love both Go and Ruby. Each of them shines on different scenarios.
nine_k 8y ago
Take a look at Tup, too. http://gittup.org/tup/ http://gittup.org/tup/

BlackLotus89 8y ago

Meh I hate generic names like this, especially if they are taken already. For instance taskwarrior uses the task binary as well. Have to take a look at it nonetheless https://taskwarrior.org/ https://taskwarrior.org/

rovr138 8y ago
The name was throwing me off. Thought it was relating to TaskWarrior at first.

eknkc 8y ago

I’ve been using Task on multiple projects for a couple of months now. Initially I whated to be able to easily create some deployment config files using it’s templating features. Worked great. Now I just default to task instead of make on new stuff.

ianwalter 8y ago

Used this for a project about a year ago and it was great. There was room for improvement, but it did what we needed it to do without any fuss.

fourseventy 8y ago

I've been putting off setting up a makefile for my project. I'll give this a go

cmcginty 8y ago

Please forgive me, but how is this easier to use than make? I see a lot of these "reimplement tool X in language Y" projects, but what is the point if it's not actually solving the problem better. Just looking at the link it seems to resemble Ant which also started with similar design goals.

TeddyDD 8y ago
I'm not sure about task but I use Just [1] - it's similar program. It's nice way to collect commands you often run in given project. Make is build system, with strong focus on building C program. It has clunky syntax and many quirks. Just is just taks runner ;) [1]: https://github.com/casey/just https://github.com/casey/just

swalladge 8y ago

> you just need to describe your build tasks using a simple YAML schema I don't understand this. How is it easier/nicer to learn an arbitrary schema in an ambiguous[1] data serialization language than the makefile syntax which was designed specifically for the purpose? I'm not criticising the project; I'm sure a lot of work has gone into it and it is decent software. But I wouldn't encourage people to be quick to disregard 'difficult' mature software and jump at something new that makes claims about being 'simple and easy'. [1]: https://github.com/cblp/yaml-sucks/ https://github.com/cblp/yaml-sucks/

dis-sys 8y ago
> the makefile syntax which was designed specifically for the purpose? and proven by generations of programmers. the (very sad) problem here is that for some people makefile is not trendy, it is something first released 42 years ago.
- snarfy 8y ago
  As someone who's been using makefiles for about 30 of those years, I have to say make sucks. It's barely evolved at all. There is a reason there are so many alternatives to it, and it's not be because it's trendy. I mean, you can't even copy a file with it. That takes an external program.
  - convolvatron 8y ago
    it does. unfortunately its still the one i reach for because it never seems like a good time to research alternatives. generally the tools that are optimized to make the common case easy aren't so useful to me because i often have alot of intermediate build artifacts/stages. and i really like the declarative nature of make..just not all the fragility and warts. does anyone have any suggestions for a nice general declarative alternative?
    - FeatureIncomple 8y ago
      > I often have a lot of intermediate build artifacts/stages I don't know your use case in depth, but I don't see why Task wouldn't work for you, since it's similar to Make in this regard. You can have multiple tasks (for each step) and then either set dependencies or have a task that call all other tasks in the right sequence. And, of course, you'd have to enable [this](https://taskfile.org/#/usage?id=prevent-unnecessary-work https://taskfile.org/#/usage?id=prevent-unnecessary-work). Anyway, seems that Make is already enough for you, since you're used to it's quirks.

IshKebab 8y ago

YAML is a terrible choice.