On 10/5/2011 4:13 PM, Peter Kümmel wrote:
On 05.10.2011 20:38, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
On Wednesday 05 October 2011, Peter Kümmel wrote:
And here some numbers to compare it with Qt's qmake.
I've used this project: http://kst-plot.kde.org/
which supports qmake and cmake.
Running make/ninja on a fresh compiled project
with warm caches (in seconds):
qmake cmake Ninja
Makefiles makefiles
-j1 0.5-0.8 1.6-1.9 0.11-0.14
-j2 0.6-0.8 1.3-1.4 0.11-0.13
-j4 0.6-0.7 1.1-1.4 0.10-0.13
Summary:
- Ninja is the fastest
- cmake Makefiles are really slow
- parallel jobs doesn't help much in this special case
OK, so I think this project is way too small for this test. There is
some fixed overhead in the process here, and we are seeing it. We are
talking about .5 seconds difference to check a whole build system. If
you want to do tests like this, you need a much bigger project. I am
sure that CMake will not be 50% slower for a larger project where we are
not comparing .5 seconds to 1.1 seconds or .1 seconds.
-Bill
--
Powered by www.kitware.com
Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at:
http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ
Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
