Make
Classic build automation tool that runs rules defined in Makefiles to build software.
HN commenters like Make for its simplicity and decades-long reliability,123 and use it beyond C builds for dotfiles, code generation and project commands.4567 The most common complaint is clunky ergonomics compared with Just or mise,89 along with a poor experience on Windows.10
Why people recommend it
Simple and durable · 3
Commenters value Make as a simple, reliable tool they have stuck with for years.
“I love the simplicity and power of good old Make.”
“Still a big fan of make all these decades later.”
Show 1 more
“eventually settled into good old Make.”
Versatile uses · 3
It handles non-build jobs like dotfile symlinks, generated sources and self-documenting help targets.
“eventually settled into good old Make.”
“my app projects all use a Makefile”
Show 1 more
“I use this pattern for my makefiles.”
Enthusiastic fans · 3
Users from beginners to long-time C developers say they love Make or have come to appreciate it.
“I love make.”
“`make` is better than I used to give it credit for, though”
Show 1 more
“Still a big fan of make all these decades later.”
Over CMake · 1
One commenter argues Make plus manual vendoring is hard to beat compared with CMake.
“once you've understood [1] and [2], it's pretty hard to justify cmake over make + manual vendoring.”
Task runner · 1
Some prefer Make over newer tools like mise for repo task automation.
Caveats and dissent
Ergonomics · 2
Some switched to Just or mise because they make developers fight the tool less.
“I vastly prefer either of them to make for the kinds of languages I mostly use.”
“Make on Windows sucks royally.”
Windows support · 1
Make on Windows is described as a painful experience.
“Make on Windows sucks royally.”
Learning curve · 3
Advanced uses require knowing Make well, and misunderstanding it leads to poor workarounds.
“my app projects all use a Makefile”
“once you've understood [1] and [2], it's pretty hard to justify cmake over make + manual vendoring.”
Show 1 more
“Still a big fan of make all these decades later.”
Often compared with
Who recommends it in their own words
Threads where it came up
- Show HN: Home Maker: Declare Your Dev Tools in a Makefile 3 mentions
- Use Task Runners for Common Coding Tasks 2 mentions
- Rust Style Guide 1 mention
- Recursive `make` and `-j` 1 mention
- Migrating from GNU Stow to Chezmoi 1 mention
- OCaml Onboarding: Introduction to the Dune build system 1 mention
Also written as make. Data: make.json. Quotes are verbatim; the verdict and theme labels are written by a model from these comments, and every clause links to its sources.
All comments 12
“`make` is better than I used to give it credit for, though”
“Still a big fan of make all these decades later.”
“I use this pattern for my makefiles.”
“I vastly prefer either of them to make for the kinds of languages I mostly use.”
“eventually settled into good old Make.”
“my app projects all use a Makefile”
“Build automations (Make, Zapier, n8n)”
“I typically prefer to use Make for this kind of stuff”
“I love make.”
“Make on Windows sucks royally.”
“I love the simplicity and power of good old Make.”
“once you've understood [1] and [2], it's pretty hard to justify cmake over make + manual vendoring.”