On Wednesday, 3 June 2015 at 10:37:24 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Wednesday, 3 June 2015 at 07:50:53 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
On Wednesday, 3 June 2015 at 07:05:37 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
Project size is irrelevant here. I had 500 line C++ project
that took 10 minutes to compile (hello boost::spirit). It is
impossible for C++ to compile faster than D by design. Any
time it seems so you either aren't comparing same thing or
get misinformed. Or do straightforward separate compilation.
Even C.
Now really? C was designed at a time where you couldn't even
hold the source file in memory, so there is not even a need for
an explicit AST.
C can essentially be "streamed" in separate passes:
cpp->cc->asm->linking
If compiling C is slow, it is just the compiler or the build
system, not the language.
Yes really, specially when comparing with Turbo Pascal, Delphi,
Modula-2, Oberon and a few other languages not tied to UNIX
linker model.
Multiply that hour times HP-UX (aCC), Solaris (SunPro), Windows
(cl), Aix (xlc), Red-Hat Linux (gcc). Which were the systems
being used.
As a side note, Visual C++ 2015 will be quite fast.
http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/Build/2015/3-610
They literal have re-done their linker to use a database model
and support incremental linking.
Similarly to what IBM did with Visual C++ Code Store and Lucid's
Energize.
All the solutions have in common not relying in the traditional
UNIX linker model.
--
Paulo
