When comparing Bazel vs Please, the Slant community recommends Bazel for most people. In the question“What are the best open-source build systems for C/C++?” Bazel is ranked 8th while Please is ranked 17th. The most important reason people chose Bazel is:
Builds only use input files that are explicitly declared in the build specification. On Linux, Bazel runs tools in a sandboxed environment that contain only the minimum necessary files required.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Correct and repeatable builds
Builds only use input files that are explicitly declared in the build specification. On Linux, Bazel runs tools in a sandboxed environment that contain only the minimum necessary files required.
Pro Fast even at scale
Even at large scale it's pretty fast (it's based on what Google uses internally for their huge code base).
Pro Can rule shell commands
Pro Handles mixed language builds
Pro High level build descriptions
Pro Build rule errors are informative
When builds fail because of an issue in the build rules, the errors provided are usually very informative and helpful to resolve the issue.
Pro Good IDE support
Pro Standard protocol for remote execution and caching
Pro Remote execution of commands
Pro Cross-platform
Linux, macOS, FreeBSD.
Pro Intuitive syntax and workflow
Much simpler than multi-tier build systems, like Make and Ninja.
Pro Code Completion
Works with many IDEs, including Visual Studio Code.
Cons
Con Draconian sandboxing, explicit inputs requirement
Requirement to explicitly name all inputs disqualifies Bazel for many workflows, e.g. those relying on tools that scan a directory tree themselves looking for files to process. Sandboxing as implemented in Bazel imposes further restrictions. If a command is successful when you type it in the shell, it should also be successful when pasted verbatim into a rule, but with Bazel it very often isn't.
Con Confusing for beginners
With so many capabilities, trying to implement with a simple project is overkill and unpleasant.