On 18/09/12 16:37, Justin Lebar wrote:
ldcache would hash object files and spit out linked files. It would use an entirely separate cache. Its handling of command-line options would be entirely different. Its processing of input files would be entirely different. ISTM that very little would be shared.
It takes multiple input files and returns a single output file, plus stderr. This much is the same.
An input object file is just as hashable as an input header file, you just find them a different way. I think the manifest file would need little or no modification.
Similarly, the output file is just as cacheable. There's probably no need to even use a different suffix in the cache.
I've yet to get into the precise details, but I think the file discovery mechanism would need to be abstracted out a little, but that's the biggest change.
The command line parsing would need a once over, of course. The biggest change there is that it's more normal to list multiple input files on the command line, and there's no "language" to determine.
Since this is targeting a niche use-case and is a large change to ccache, I'd be hesitant to take this change upstream, if I were Joel.
Right, as little churn as possible, and no extra overhead in the most common cases.
Andrew _______________________________________________ ccache mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/ccache