On Tue, Oct 30, 2018, 5:21 PM George Nash <george.n...@intel.com> wrote:

> Using a cached build sounds like a good idea on paper.
>
> I honestly have only worked on projects that do not use a cached build.
> For a very long time I wanted to move to a build that used a cached build
> to speed up the build. After a few years, I have come to the conclusion a
> cached build is not a good idea.
>

How do you think build tools decide what to compile and what not to compile?

Number one reason for not using a cached build. "Reliability".
>   - Case 1: A problem is solved just by doing a clean build.
>

A non-starter, unless you're building Hello World. I do not need a clean 3
hour build if I changed 1 line of code.

  - Case 2: A problem is hidden because a left over build product from the
> cached build items.
>

Only a problem if your build tool fails to catch the problem.

A false failure like Case 1 where the build fails but can be fixed with a
> clean build is annoying but not a critical problem


It is a critical problem, economically. That's the whole point of build
tools that optimize building.

as long as there is a way to force a clean build. The big problem is Case 2
> where it passes because of picking up something from the cached build.


That just means your build tooling is flawed.

The error will, likely, not be caught till it is merged. Both problems I
> agree are unusual but they still happen.
>
> I am all for speeding up the build but I suspect adding cached build would
> cause more problems than its worth.
>

All "modern" build tools use caching, one way or another. Without it they
would have no way of knowing what to build and what not to build.

G

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#9988): 
https://lists.iotivity.org/g/iotivity-dev/message/9988
Mute This Topic: https://lists.iotivity.org/mt/27787640/21656
Group Owner: iotivity-dev+ow...@lists.iotivity.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.iotivity.org/g/iotivity-dev/unsub  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to