./configure.py generates the
build.ninja files used to build ninja. It accepts various flags to adjust build parameters.
The primary build target of interest is
ninja, but when hacking on Ninja your changes should be testable so it's more useful to build and run
ninja_test when developing.
./bootstrap.py creates a bootstrap
ninja and runs the above process; it‘s only necessary to run if you don’t have a copy of
ninja to build with.)
Build in “debug” mode while developing (disables optimizations and builds way faster on Windows):
To use clang, set
Github pull requests are convenient for me to merge (I can just click a button and it‘s all handled server-side), but I’m also comfortable accepting pre-github git patches (via
Good pull requests have all of these attributes:
These are typically merged without hesitation. If a change is lacking any of the above I usually will ask you to fix it, though there are obvious exceptions (fixing typos in comments don't need tests).
I am very wary of changes that increase the complexity of Ninja (in particular, new build file syntax or command-line flags) or increase the maintenance burden of Ninja. Ninja is already successfully in use by hundreds of developers for large projects and it already achieves (most of) the goals I set out for it to do. It's probably best to discuss new feature ideas on the mailing list before I shoot down your patch.
ninja_test binary, containing all the tests, depends on the googletest (gtest) library.
On older Ubuntus it'll install as libraries into
apt-get install libgtest
On newer Ubuntus it's only distributed as source
apt-get install libgtest-dev ./configure --with-gtest=/usr/src/gtest
Set your build command to
./ninja ninja_test && ./ninja_test --gtest_filter=MyTest.Name
now you can repeatedly run that while developing until the tests pass (I frequently set it as my compilation command in Emacs). Remember to build “all” before committing to verify the other source still works!
If you have a Chrome build handy, it's a good test case. Otherwise, the github downoads page has a copy of the Chrome build files (and depfiles). You can untar that, then run
and compare that against a baseline Ninja.
There's a script at
misc/measure.py that repeatedly runs a command like the above (to address variance) and summarizes its runtime. E.g.
path/to/misc/measure.py path/to/my/ninja chrome
For changing the depfile parser, you can also build
parser_perftest and run that directly on some representative input files.
Generally it's the Google C++ coding style, but in brief:
\ato refer to arguments.
CanonicalizePath(string* path, string* err), the arguments are hopefully obvious)
sudo apt-get install asciidoc --no-install-recommends ./ninja manual
sudo apt-get install doxygen ./ninja doxygen
While developing, it‘s helpful to copy
ninja.exe to another name like
n.exe; otherwise, rebuilds will be unable to write
ninja.exe because it’s locked while in use.
sudo apt-get install gcc-mingw32 wine
export CC=i586-mingw32msvc-cc CXX=i586-mingw32msvc-c++ AR=i586-mingw32msvc-ar
./configure.py --platform=mingw --host=linux
ninja.exeusing a Linux ninja binary:
./ninja.exe(implicitly runs through wine(!))