CMake vs SCons

Overview

CMake

Stacks4.0K

Followers294

Votes1

SCons

Stacks8

Followers17

Votes0

GitHub Stars2.3K

Forks338

CMake vs SCons: What are the differences?

Introduction

This article compares and highlights the key differences between CMake and SCons, two popular build system tools used in software development.

Language and Syntax: CMake uses its own scripting language based on the C programming language, while SCons uses Python as its configuration and build scripting language. This means that CMake scripts are written in a C-like syntax, while SCons scripts use Python syntax.
Configuration Files: CMake uses "CMakeLists.txt" files to define the project structure and build process, organizing targets and dependencies. On the other hand, SCons uses a "SConstruct" file, which is a build configuration file written in Python that defines the build process and dependencies.
Platform Support: CMake is designed to be platform-independent, allowing developers to generate build systems for various platforms (Windows, macOS, Linux, etc.) using the same configuration files. SCons, however, requires Python to be installed on the target system, limiting its cross-platform capabilities.
Build Performance: CMake uses a two-step process where it first generates platform-specific build files (e.g., Makefiles) and then uses the underlying build tool (e.g., make) to perform the actual build. This separation can reduce the build performance compared to SCons, which directly executes the build commands without the need for an intermediate step.
Customization and Extensibility: CMake provides a wide range of modules, commands, and variables that can be used to customize the build process and integrate with external libraries or tools. SCons, on the other hand, leverages the full power of the Python scripting language, allowing developers to extend and customize the build system in a more flexible and versatile manner.
Ecosystem and Adoption: CMake has been adopted by a large number of projects, libraries, and frameworks across different programming languages and platforms, making it more popular and supported. SCons, although widely used in certain domains, does not enjoy the same level of widespread adoption and ecosystem as CMake.

In summary, the key differences between CMake and SCons lie in their scripting languages, configuration files, platform support, build performance, customization capabilities, and adoption.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Detailed Comparison

CMake	SCons
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.	It is an Open Source software construction tool—that is, a next-generation build tool. Think of it as an improved, cross-platform substitute for the classic Make utility with integrated functionality similar to autoconf/automake and compiler caches such as ccache. In short, it is an easier, more reliable and faster way to build software.
-	Reliable, automatic dependency analysis built-in for C, C++ and Fortran; Use the power of a real programming language to solve build problems; Built-in support for fetching source files from SCCS, RCS, CVS, BitKeeper and Perforce; Reliable detection of build changes using MD5 signatures
Statistics
GitHub Stars -	GitHub Stars 2.3K
GitHub Forks -	GitHub Forks 338
Stacks 4.0K	Stacks 8
Followers 294	Followers 17
Votes 1	Votes 0
Pros & Cons
Pros 1 Has package registry	No community feedback yet
Integrations
No integrations available	Java Visual Studio C++ Qt Perforce BitKeeper

What are some alternatives to CMake, SCons?

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.

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.

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.

Pants

Pants is a build system for Java, Scala and Python. It works particularly well for a source code repository that contains many distinct projects.

JitPack

JitPack is an easy to use package repository for Gradle/Sbt and Maven projects. We build GitHub projects on demand and provides ready-to-use packages.

SBT

It is similar to Java's Maven and Ant. Its main features are: Native support for compiling Scala code and integrating with many Scala test frameworks.

Buck

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

Apache Ant

Ant is a Java-based build tool. In theory, it is kind of like Make, without Make's wrinkles and with the full portability of pure Java code.

Please

Please is a cross-language build system with an emphasis on high performance, extensibility and reproduceability. It supports a number of popular languages and can automate nearly any aspect of your build process.

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

Related Comparisons

Bitbucket vs GitHub vs GitLab

AWS CodeCommit vs Bitbucket vs GitHub

Docker Swarm vs Kubernetes vs Rancher

Grunt vs Webpack vs gulp

Grafana vs Graphite vs Kibana

CMake vs SCons: What are the differences?

Introduction

This article compares and highlights the key differences between CMake and SCons, two popular build system tools used in software development.

Language and Syntax: CMake uses its own scripting language based on the C programming language, while SCons uses Python as its configuration and build scripting language. This means that CMake scripts are written in a C-like syntax, while SCons scripts use Python syntax.
Configuration Files: CMake uses "CMakeLists.txt" files to define the project structure and build process, organizing targets and dependencies. On the other hand, SCons uses a "SConstruct" file, which is a build configuration file written in Python that defines the build process and dependencies.
Platform Support: CMake is designed to be platform-independent, allowing developers to generate build systems for various platforms (Windows, macOS, Linux, etc.) using the same configuration files. SCons, however, requires Python to be installed on the target system, limiting its cross-platform capabilities.
Build Performance: CMake uses a two-step process where it first generates platform-specific build files (e.g., Makefiles) and then uses the underlying build tool (e.g., make) to perform the actual build. This separation can reduce the build performance compared to SCons, which directly executes the build commands without the need for an intermediate step.
Customization and Extensibility: CMake provides a wide range of modules, commands, and variables that can be used to customize the build process and integrate with external libraries or tools. SCons, on the other hand, leverages the full power of the Python scripting language, allowing developers to extend and customize the build system in a more flexible and versatile manner.
Ecosystem and Adoption: CMake has been adopted by a large number of projects, libraries, and frameworks across different programming languages and platforms, making it more popular and supported. SCons, although widely used in certain domains, does not enjoy the same level of widespread adoption and ecosystem as CMake.

In summary, the key differences between CMake and SCons lie in their scripting languages, configuration files, platform support, build performance, customization capabilities, and adoption.