On 25.03.2013 20:52, janI wrote:
I might help here with the experience I have from vienna, where we had
a huge build system, and I am still in contact with the people who
maintains it. One idea just of the top, is not to start the compiler
for each file, but collect the filenames needing to be compiled, and
then start the compiler once with all filenames, that saves LOTS of
cpu cycles.
Hi Jan,
Please excuse the long delay, I got "distracted" by my sidebar work.
Yes, I would very much like to learn more about your experience in Vienna.
I am currently thinking about two things:
1 The one good part about our build system, the old and the new, is, in
my opinion, the separation of data and behavior. Makefiles in modules
contain only (well, mostly) just data like which files to compile and
what goes into which library. The behavior is concentrated in
solenv/inc or solenv/gbuild. I wonder if others do that also?
2. Most of us know at least one language with C like syntax (I would
include Java into this). Why are we still using Make with its rather
unique, or shall I say bizarre, syntax or syntaxes (recipes are shell
scripts, the rest is Makes own macro expansion language). Would a
language much close to C syntax not make much more sense? I am
currently making experiments in this direction.
It seems to be so much more straightforward to use a C language and add
a support for file dependencies and parallel jobs then take Make and
define your own almost-object-oriented language on top, like in build.
Regarding the idea of calling the compiler with more than one file:
Herbert recently made some experiments in this direction (on Windows)
and had very good results. Something like up to 40% reduction of
compile time.
Best regards,
Andre
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
