Here’s the Deal
Slant is powered by a community that helps you make informed decisions. Tell us what you’re passionate about to get your personalized feed and help others.
When comparing Qbs vs Tup, the Slant community recommends Tup for most people. In the question“What are the best open-source build systems for C/C++?” Tup is ranked 5th while Qbs is ranked 13th. The most important reason people chose Tup is:
It is very fast.
Specs
No specs yet!
PlatformsWindows, Linux, Mac
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Common Questions
Other Questions
Pros
Pro Declarative paradigm like js
Pro Well-defined language
Pro Supports all kinds of toolchains, even for exotic bare-metal architectures
Pro Cross platform
Pro Very well-written documentation
Pro Excellent dependency tracking
Pro Powerful and easy-to-learn concepts
Pro Speed
It is very fast.
Pro Tidy
It will automatically clean-up old files.
Pro General
Not bound to C/C++.
Pro Lua
Tup supports writing build definitions using Lua or Tupfiles.
Pro Cross platform
Supports Linux, OSX, and Windows.
Cons
Con Small community
Con Variants not working on Windows
The solution for having different build configuration (think Release/Debug) is broken on Windows.
Con Cannot incrementally modify or delete files
Cannot incrementally modify files (e.g. LaTeX PDF, VISing and LIGHTing Quake maps, which takes the same BSP file as input and output), and will not delete files (e.g. rm build/*.o).