On 6/10/09, John Calcote <[email protected]> wrote: > One more comment Mike - I think it would be most instructive (not to mention > most interesting to the GNU make community) to modify GNU make to use "Beta > build system" algorithms. I don't really see any conflict (off the top of my > head) between beta algorithms and makefile syntax, so I may just take a stab > at it.
Thanks for the comments John! The main problem I think you would run into with make is that the Makefiles and included dependency files are fairly free-form. While this is certainly nice when you're writing them, I think it is difficult to come up with a way to only load the parts of the graph that are necessary even if you have a list of file changes up front. If you take a C program and provide the input "foo.h" has changed, which Makefiles need to be parsed in order to make sure all links to foo.h are satisfied? If you're using an autodependency generation method (like with 'gcc -MMD'), any of those generated .d files could list foo.h as a dependency. I'd love to be proven wrong though! Perhaps you can come up with a good way to restructure the information so make can only load what it needs. Also, in response to your other email, if you have any questions about tup specifically feel free to ask that on the tup-users mailing list linked on the webpage. I just made that like a week ago though, and it's currently only me and a few of my friends who I forced to sign up. -Mike _______________________________________________ Help-make mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-make
