On Friday, 19 September 2014 at 19:22:22 UTC, ketmar via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Fri, 19 Sep 2014 19:07:16 +0000
Cliff via Digitalmars-d <[email protected]> wrote:
that's why dedicating people to work solely on build scripts and
infrastructure is good, yet almost nobody does that. ah,
"enterprise
BS" again. fsck "enterprise".
as for build times: we always can write parsed and analyzed
ASTs to
disk (something like delphi .dcu), thus skipping the most work
next
time. and then we can compare cached AST with new if the source
was
changed to see what exactly was changed and report that (oh,
there is
new function, one function removed, one turned to template, and
so on).
this will greatly speed up builds without relying on ugly
"header/implementation" model.
the only good thing "enterprise" can do is to contribute and
then
support such code. but i'm sure they never will, they will only
complaing about how they want "faster build times". hell with
'em.
In a sense I sympathize with your antipath toward enterprises,
but the simple fact is they have a lot of money and command a lot
of developers. For us, developers = mind share = more libraries
for us to use and more ideas to go around. That's all goodness.
Leverage it for what it's worth.
I'm definitely a fan of finding ways to improve build speeds that
don't involve the creation of unnecessary (or worse, redundant)
and user maintained artifacts. I'm also a fan of simplifying the
build process so that we don't have to have experts maintain
build scripts.
