Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

Buck

27
146
+ 1
8
CMake

3.8K
286
+ 1
1
Add tool

Buck vs CMake: What are the differences?

Introduction:

Buck and CMake are both build systems commonly used in software development. While they serve a similar purpose, there are several key differences between the two. This markdown document will outline six specific differences between Buck and CMake.

  1. Build Configuration Language: One significant difference between Buck and CMake is the programming language used for build configuration. Buck uses a domain-specific language (DSL) called Starlark, which is a type of Python. On the other hand, CMake uses its own scripting language, which is separate from any other programming language. This distinction in languages can impact the readability and familiarity of the build configuration for developers.

  2. Build File Format: Buck and CMake also differ in their build file formats. Buck uses .buck files as its build file format, which is a JSON-like format. In contrast, CMake utilizes CMakeLists.txt files as its build file format, which is a plain text file. The difference in file formats can affect how the build configuration is organized and maintained.

  3. Integration with IDEs: Another key difference between Buck and CMake is their integration with integrated development environments (IDEs). Buck has built-in support and plugins for various IDEs, such as IntelliJ IDEA, Eclipse, and Visual Studio Code. On the other hand, CMake relies on the IDE's ability to understand and process CMakeLists.txt files. This difference in integration can impact the development experience and tooling available to the developers.

  4. Dependency Management: Buck and CMake handle dependency management in different ways. Buck has built-in support for fine-grained dependency management, allowing developers to define dependencies at a granular level. In contrast, CMake relies on external dependency management tools, such as Conan or vcpkg, to handle dependencies. The difference in dependency management approaches can impact the complexity and flexibility of managing project dependencies.

  5. Build Performance: Buck is known for its emphasis on fast and incremental builds. It achieves this by analyzing the build graph and only building the necessary targets affected by code changes. CMake, on the other hand, may require full rebuilds in certain scenarios, especially when dealing with complex build dependencies. The difference in build performance can impact the development workflow and iteration time.

  6. Platform Compatibility: Buck and CMake also differ in their platform compatibility. Buck is primarily designed for Java and Android development, although it does support other programming languages as well. CMake, on the other hand, is more versatile and widely used across various programming languages and platforms, including C, C++, and more. The difference in platform compatibility can affect the choice of build system for specific project requirements.

In Summary, Buck and CMake differ in their build configuration language, build file format, integration with IDEs, dependency management, build performance, and platform compatibility. These differences can impact the developer experience, project organization, and overall build process.

Get Advice from developers at your company using StackShare Enterprise. Sign up for StackShare Enterprise.
Learn More
Pros of Buck
Pros of CMake
  • 4
    Fast
  • 1
    Java
  • 1
    Facebook
  • 1
    Runs on OSX
  • 1
    Windows Support
  • 1
    Has package registry

Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions

Cons of Buck
Cons of CMake
  • 2
    Lack of Documentation
  • 1
    Learning Curve
    Be the first to leave a con

    Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions

    - No public GitHub repository available -

    What is Buck?

    Buck encourages the creation of small, reusable modules consisting of code and resources, and supports a variety of languages on many platforms.

    What is CMake?

    It is used to control the software compilation process using simple platform and compiler independent configuration files, and generate native makefiles and workspaces that can be used in the compiler environment of the user's choice.

    Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

    What companies use Buck?
    What companies use CMake?
    See which teams inside your own company are using Buck or CMake.
    Sign up for StackShare EnterpriseLearn More

    Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions

    What tools integrate with Buck?
    What tools integrate with CMake?
    What are some alternatives to Buck and CMake?
    Bazel
    Bazel is a build tool that builds code quickly and reliably. It is used to build the majority of Google's software, and thus it has been designed to handle build problems present in Google's development environment.
    Gradle
    Gradle is a build tool with a focus on build automation and support for multi-language development. If you are building, testing, publishing, and deploying software on any platform, Gradle offers a flexible model that can support the entire development lifecycle from compiling and packaging code to publishing web sites.
    Apache Maven
    Maven allows a project to build using its project object model (POM) and a set of plugins that are shared by all projects using Maven, providing a uniform build system. Once you familiarize yourself with how one Maven project builds you automatically know how all Maven projects build saving you immense amounts of time when trying to navigate many projects.
    Sonatype Nexus
    It is an open source repository that supports many artifact formats, including Docker, Java™ and npm. With the Nexus tool integration, pipelines in your toolchain can publish and retrieve versioned apps and their dependencies
    JFrog Artifactory
    It integrates with your existing ecosystem supporting end-to-end binary management that overcomes the complexity of working with different software package management systems, and provides consistency to your CI/CD workflow.
    See all alternatives