On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Miles Bader <[email protected]> wrote: > 2011/12/26 Olaf van der Spek <[email protected]>: >>> Faster enough to be worth the annoyance for the developer of twisting >>> his source code to fit the "pch style" (which seems notably uglier)? >> >> Yes >> I'm not sure what twisting you're referring too though. > > Another comment noted that PCH was often ineffective or even > counter-productive unless the bulk of your includes are precisely the > same between compilation units, and that in practice systems like VS > try to get the user to define a single "include everything" header > file (presumably instead of the normal practice of "include the stuff > you use"). > > Sounds pretty darn ugly (and I expect makes compile times far worse if > you _can't_ use PCH in some case)...
Is someone forcing you to use PCH? I'm not sure what your point is. -- Olaf
