HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
abseil
abseil-py
Python2017–2021
abseil / abseil-py

abseil-py

Abseil Common Libraries (Python)

4Distinct people
4Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
2.5KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Abseil Common Libraries (Python)

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 3:56:07 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year4 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2017-09-26 22:02:01 UTC to 2021-11-07 01:09:54 UTC.

0122017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 1 submissions, 1 comments20172018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments20192020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2021

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC211
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

4 sources
> Sounds a lot like Nix's philosophy of totally sandboxed/declarative package builds They are similar but I think of Nix as being closer to Dockerfiles than to Bazel. Nix describes how to compose and build things, of multiple build systems, in a unixy environment. It sandboxes things and runs commands in those things like `make install` and then pulls the files those commands generates out and uses them for other things. This is very close to how people use Dockerfiles but very different to how someone would go about using Bazel. Bazel's main selling points are that it allows you to describe how your software is built by using application level concepts. Bazel has `library`, `binary`, and `test`. Regardless of what the language we're talking about any two programmers will probably know what these high level concepts mean and, due to conve
Read the rest
ntions in rules, any developer - regardless if they have experience in the language in question - can understand what is going on. Bazel is also much finer grained than something like Nix. For example, the NixPkg for abseil-py is defined here: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/nixos-21.05/pkgs/devel... The BUILD files for abseil-py are found in the repo. Something you'll notice is that there isn't a single build target for all of abseil-py. Instead, each python module or "library" has it's own target: https://github.com/abseil/abseil-py/blob/master/absl/BUILD#L... This allows for some cool stuff when deploying your software. Suppose you import just the flags module from this repo. That means that your built `py_binary` artifact will only contain just the modules that you're actually importing. You can also see the dependancy graph for all of your source code by talking to Bazel's query API. Find a bug in a library? You can now instantly query every single `binary` that those source files went into without false positives. That's just an example of something you may want to do but really you now have a way to query the dep graph for all languages and tools so the sky is the limit. > instead of needing a monorepo with every piece of software you can just grab a reproducible build from nixpkgs You also don't need a monorepo for Bazel to work. You can use `http_archive` or `git_repository` to load specific WORKSPACEs. For example: https://abseil.io/docs/cpp/quickstart#set-up-a-bazel-workspa... Also bzlmod is being worked on (a package manager that automates this stuff). This also has provisions for running all of the `_test` targets on deps after they're compiled by your toolchain and on your hardware. This validates that all importing and compiling worked as expected (which most build systems can't accommodate).
In Reflecting on the Shake Build System
I work in TensorFlow with some regularity, and I've seen explicit examples of what the author of the article talks about where Googlers get used to their own stack (See eg: https://github.com/abseil/abseil-py/issues/99#issuecomment-4... vs what is considered standard Python practice https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/issues/26691#issuec... ) That said, I also see the opposite when this gets some traction with "normal users". The Abseil issue was fixed, and the TensorFlow 2.0 release did make TensorFlow more usable by smaller teams in many situations.
In Etcd, or, why modern software makes me sad

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.