On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 5:12 PM Jed Brown <j...@jedbrown.org> wrote:
> Roy Stogner <royst...@ices.utexas.edu> writes:
> It also parallelizes better because make has a flat and complete
> dependency graph. Non-recursive make is much better.
>
Definitely! In MOOSE we actually create the entire list of of files to be
compiled across multiple applications and up and down the application /
library hierarchy so that we get max parallelism. libMesh's build is very
"stuttery" by comparison (bursts of files are compiled simultaneously) and
definitely leads to build slowdown.
> It's necessary to catch errors if a symbol is removed from the library.
> Automake/make has no way to know if changes have that effect.
>
The binaries that Roy is talking about aren't "test' binaries though.
They're just utilities that libMesh has grown over the years. I would love
to be able to turn them completely off. They do take a decent amount of
time to link - especially on slower networked filesystems.
> It is possible to link a bunch of examples together into one executable
> that behaves differently depending on its name (for example).
>
I don't think that's critical for this case. We just don't need to build
these binaries most of the time.
Derek
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Libmesh-devel mailing list
Libmesh-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-devel
