Hi guys,
I have been looking at the memory monster that SCons can be inside my view of
the Parts addon.
On object that I get a lot of in Parts is SCons.Environment.Base objects. Parts
of this is that I make a clone based every Parts, to prevent a huge host of
problems that come from sharing environments in different "components". It
seems to me that maybe whole way we look at Clone() is wrong. Instead of making
a clean copy of all the possible mutable values, it seems that maybe it would
better to use an OverrideEnvironment object. This would save a lot of memory. I
need to clarify this would have to be a slightly more conservative object than
the current OverrideEnvironment object in SCons in that the main issue with
using it in the current form is the code:
if "/md" in env['CPPFLAGS']:
env['CPPFLAGS'].remove(/'md')
The reason for this is that copy one write logic would not see the remove()
function being called, effecting other components that would want the '/md'
flags to exists.
To correct this one could make Scons overrides to the python object that could
notify environment that it was modify, so it make a copy of the given object
before the modification would happen. I see this is ideal, but probably
technical problematic for many different reasons.
The more realistic option I think might be to just have __getitem__ function
make a copy in the overrides if the user called it ( can probably do this with
a state var, that says we are in Scons/internal code such as subst(), vs
reading a build files). Given that most of the values are not touched by the
user, only a minimum of values need to copy, ideally a lot less that we do with
a normal Clone().
Any thoughts on this? I was thinking of testing this idea in Parts. It seems
that this code would be a pretty simple object that would just copy paste
straight into Scons if I got it working.
Jason
_______________________________________________
Scons-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
