The success and failure of Ninja (2020)

	▲	The success and failure of Ninja (2020)(neugierig.org)
		297 points by quincepie a year ago \| 4 comments

	▲	willvarfar a year ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> we talk about programming like it is about writing code, but the code ends up being less important than the architecture, and the architecture ends up being less important than social issues. A thousand times this! This puts into words something that's been lurking in the back of my mind for a very long time.
	▲	dang a year ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Discussed at the time: The Success and Failure of Ninja - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23157783 - May 2020 (38 comments) (Reposts are fine after a year or so! links to past threads are just to satisfy extra-curious readers)
	▲	defer a year ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		This is hilarious to me: `Android, which uses it for some large component of the system that I've never quite understood` Ninja is really a huge part of AOSP, the build system initially used makefiles. Things got complex really fast with a custom declarative build system (soong) and a failed/aborted migration to bazel. Google developed kati (https://github.com/google/kati) which converts Makefiles to ninja build files (or should I say file), which really is huge: `λ wc -l out/build-qssi.ninja 3035442 out/build-qssi.ninja` Going from makefiles/soong to ninja is painful, it takes several minutes even in a modern machine but it simply flies once ninja picks it up.
	▲	high_priest a year ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> I also believe that programmers feel latency and it affects their mood even if they don't notice it. (Google has recently done some research in this area that kinda confirmed my belief, here's hoping they'll publish it publicly!) Anyone knows if it happened? Has the google research on latency been published?