there is any execution difference or any standard where we have to use makefile and sh file. Both files can generate same output. This question because some people use Makefile and some people use shell.. it's like saying all the programming languages are the same because all of them are turing-complete.
No, Makefiles are not glorified . sh files. A Makefile is an example of Declarative programming . Shell scripts are imperative.
There are some words that go together with “make” and others that go together with “do.” In other words, there are fixed expressions in English with both of these verbs, and you just have to learn them. But there are general rules you can follow: Use “make” for when you create or produce something.
$(shell) is a special function in gmake that runs an external command and captures the output for use in the makefile. For example, you could get the current working directory like this: CWD=$(shell pwd) all: @echo This makefile lives in $(CWD).
The general idea is that make
supports (reasonably) minimal rebuilds -- i.e., you tell it what parts of your program depend on what other parts. When you update some part of the program, it only rebuilds the parts that depend on that. While you could do this with a shell script, it would be a lot more work (explicitly checking the last-modified dates on all the files, etc.) The only obvious alternative with a shell script is to rebuild everything every time. For tiny projects this is a perfectly reasonable approach, but for a big project a complete rebuild could easily take an hour or more -- using make
, you might easily accomplish the same thing in a minute or two...
I should probably also add that there are quite a few alternatives to make that have at least broadly similar capabilities. Especially in cases where only a few files in a large project are being rebuilt, some of them (e.g., Ninja) are often considerably faster than make.
There are various things make does that are hard to do with shell scripts...
Make ensures that only the required files are recompiled when you make changes to your source files.
For example:
final : 1.o 2.o
gcc -o final 1.o 2.o
1.o : 1.c 2.h
gcc -c 1.c
2.o : 2.c 2.h
gcc -c 2.c
If I change the file 2.h
only & run make
, it executes all the 3 commands, in reverse order.
If I change the file 1.c
only & run make
, it only executes the first 2 commands in reverse order.
Trying to accomplish that with your own shell script will involve a lot of if/else
checking.
As well as the above, Make is a declarative(-ish) parallel programming language.
Let's say that you have 4,000 graphic files to convert and 4 CPUs. Try writing a 10-line shell script (I'm being generous here) that will do it reliably while saturating your CPUs.
Perhaps the real question is why do people bother writing shell scripts.
make handles dependencies: the makefile describes them: the binary depends on object files, each object file depends on a source file and headers ... when make is ran, the date of the files are compared to determine what needs to be re-compiled.
One can invoke directly one target not to build everything described in the Makefile.
Moreover the make syntax provides substitution, vpath
All of this can be written in shell scripts, with make you already have it.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With