On Sunday, November 17, 2013 1:08:52 AM UTC-5, robertwb wrote: > > Are you thinking that ccache and cycache won't be sufficiently fast? >
I'm not concerned with rebuilding the Sage library, that is already fast enough that I'm more annoyed by the "do you really want to force build y/n" prompt than by actually doing it. Running "sage -ba" takes 2m 14s on my laptop even without cycache. I'm thinking about package building, especially if you switch between older tickets then you'll be recompiling a good chunk of Sage. The compiler cache is not a magic bullet here, just the configure checks and possible tuning inside the packages can be an unpleasant wait. Of course you can be lucky and the older sage library works with the new packages so you don't have to rebuild packages, but I don't think that'll be always true. > Granted some package changes compile non-C code or do expensive > tuning, but those changes should be relatively rare (and cloning the > repo isn't that bad in the exceptional case). > > - Robert > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
