Sven Barth wrote:
Am 05.03.2013 10:14, schrieb Mark Morgan Lloyd:
Marco van de Voort wrote:
But even when in theory (which I btw don't even want to consider),
you are
equivalent to C in this way, it basically means disabling the unit
system,
and users must start to manual maintain dependencies, and learn to
interpretate cryptic errormessages if an incremental build goes haywire.
C users and developers are trained in this, and have their experience in
detangling the web of deps etc, have developed semi-automated helper
tools
etc.
Inflicting this on the Pascal masses is unrealistic and undesirable.
Sticking to the manual build principles because the FPC devels can
handle it
essentially means that nobody else will have parallel builds, or will
resort
to a system of doing full builds only. (but that is throwing away the
big
savings to gain small ones). Something that big C projects resort to
anyway,
I'm told.
And FPC even only in a few critical points.
Manual maintenance is simply too painful (and atypical for modular
languages and
its users).
But on the other hand, if an application programmer could disable
FPC's unit handling and use make -j instead, choosing to pay the
price of difficult maintenance, it might defuse the criticism coming
from certain quarters.
Make can not figure out the dependencies between units by itself as it
would need to parse them.
That's for the user to do, if he thinks he can do a better job than FPC.
--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk
[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel