These simple python scripts are based on the idea at https://mesonbuild.com/Simple-comparison.html
I use ccache and run the performance tests at least 2 times to decrease the compile time for each build test run.
This bring into focus the performance of the buildsystem.
Setup test suite:
clausklein$ ./gen_src.py build
generate 2 directories containing each 4 source filesRun test suite:
clausklein$ ./measure.py build
Running command: rm -rf build-cmake && mkdir -p build-cmake && cmake -DCMAKE_EXPORT_COMPILE_COMMANDS=ON -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Debug -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER_LAUNCHER=ccache -B build-cmake
Running command: make -C build-cmake -j 4
Running command: make -C build-cmake -j 4
Running command: make -C build-cmake -j 4 clean
Running command: make -C build-cmake -j 4
Running command: rm -rf build-cmake-ninja && mkdir -p build-cmake-ninja && cmake -DCMAKE_EXPORT_COMPILE_COMMANDS=ON -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Debug -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER_LAUNCHER=ccache -B build-cmake-ninja -G Ninja
Running command: ninja -C build-cmake-ninja -j 4
Running command: ninja -C build-cmake-ninja -j 4
Running command: ninja -C build-cmake-ninja -j 4 clean
Running command: ninja -C build-cmake-ninja -j 4
Running command: rm -rf build-meson && mkdir -p build-meson && CC='ccache gcc' meson build-meson
Running command: ninja -C build-meson -j 4
Running command: ninja -C build-meson -j 4
Running command: ninja -C build-meson -j 4 clean
Running command: ninja -C build-meson -j 4
cmake-make
0.865 gen
0.518 build
0.189 empty build
0.095 clean
0.566 rebuild
2.234 overall
cmake-ninja
0.718 gen
0.188 build
0.013 empty build
0.032 clean
0.204 rebuild
1.155 overall
meson
1.611 gen
0.237 build
0.013 empty build
0.022 clean
0.219 rebuild
2.101 overallOne interesting point is the different size of the generated ninja build files. The meson build generator creates only one and a simpler and clear build.ninja file:
clausklein$ find build -name '*.ninja' -ls
81941300 48 -rw-r--r-- 1 clausklein staff 21306 8 Feb 10:17 build/buildcmakeninja/build.ninja
81941301 8 -rw-r--r-- 1 clausklein staff 2681 8 Feb 10:17 build/buildcmakeninja/rules.ninja
81941494 16 -rw-r--r-- 1 clausklein staff 5686 8 Feb 10:17 build/buildmeson/build.ninja
clausklein$The https://github.com/open-source-parsers/jsoncpp use both, meson and cmake:
bash-5.0$ python3 ./build_performance_measure.py
Running command: rm -rf build-cmake-ninja && mkdir -p build-cmake-ninja && CXX=g++ cmake -DCMAKE_EXPORT_COMPILE_COMMANDS=ON -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -G Ninja -B build-cmake-ninja
Running command: ninja -C build-cmake-ninja
Running command: ninja -C build-cmake-ninja
Running command: ninja -C build-cmake-ninja clean
Running command: ninja -C build-cmake-ninja
Running command: rm -rf build-meson && mkdir -p build-meson && CXX='ccache g++' meson build-meson
Running command: ninja -C build-meson
Running command: ninja -C build-meson
Running command: ninja -C build-meson clean
Running command: ninja -C build-meson
cmake-ninja
3.755 gen
0.739 build
0.018 empty build
0.044 clean
0.721 rebuild
5.276 overall
meson
1.918 gen
1.409 build
0.014 empty build
0.032 clean
1.410 rebuild
4.784 overall
bash-5.0$Interesting is here: The compact meson.build file (only 125 lines) generates fast a realy clear build.ninja, but needs more time to build (old i386 with only 2 cores). Overall for this small project, mesonbuild is faster.
IMHO: The winner seems https://mesonbuild.com using https://ninja-build.org and https://ccache.dev
A nice project with a dual build system: cmake and meson
- https://github.com/ClausKlein/jsoncpp I used it for the second performance test.
- https://medium.com/@julienjorge/an-overview-of-build-systems-mostly-for-c-projects-ac9931494444
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_build_automation_software
- https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=bazel,meson,mpc-ace,%2Fm%2F04dl04,%2Fm%2F0cxh7f
- http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8581
- http://doc.cat-v.org/plan_9/4th_edition/papers/mk
- https://medium.com/windmill-engineering/bazel-is-the-worst-build-system-except-for-all-the-others-b369396a9e26