Re: Optimization for reading *.d files

On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 11:54 AM, brenorg wrote: > Hi Norbert, > > You are absolutely right. There is much more redundancy than I expected. I > joined all .d files in one single file and after running make on it and > printing the database, it's actually 10x smaller. And I know

Re: Optimization for reading *.d files

On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 9:25 PM, brenorg wrote: > > Anyway, I want to continue to use GNU Make, and not fallback to CMake/Ninja. > After some profiling, what's killing me is parsing the "*.d" files generated > by the compiler. > > The time to include all dependency files of my

Re: Difficulties from the combination of functions call and eval

On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 6:31 AM, SF Markus Elfring elfr...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: Yes. - The evaluated variable should produce shell commands for recipes. I try to reuse it as a subfunction. then use $(call -- or possibly $$(call, if you want to defer the call to when the recipe get

Re: Dynamic adjustments of build dependencies for the number of available processors

On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Paul Smith psm...@gnu.org wrote: On Mon, 2015-01-05 at 20:06 +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote: So you have in your toolbox $(shell) and $(eval). I am not familiar enough with the second make function.

Re: Add makefile.mak to list of default makefiles

On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Eli Zaretskii e...@gnu.org wrote: From: Paul Smith psm...@gnu.org Cc: Eli Zaretskii e...@gnu.org, bug-make@gnu.org Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2014 02:06:54 -0400 On Mon, 2014-06-30 at 21:28 +0100, Jonny Grant wrote: I have a few, but triggered by make -f makefile.mak.

Re: [PATCH1/2] Use spawn() on Cygwin

On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 10:39 AM, Eli Zaretskii e...@gnu.org wrote: From: Pavel Fedin p.fe...@samsung.com Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 14:42:23 +0400 Please take this patch, Cygwin team told that they would like to integrate with upstream. I have already posted it some time ago but got no reply.

Re: [bug #39028] [patch] fix and uniformize four error messages

On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Edward Welbourne e...@chaos.org.uk wrote: I think integer is meant instead of integral. 'integral' is the adjective form of 'integer', so, in context, it is correctly used. Eg C99 uses integral as an adjective meaning of integers, C99 and Merriam Webster,

Re: suggestion: new make function

I find your suggestions more elagant than the original, they seem more general purpose, and less let's introduce this feature to get around a specific problem. Of your two suggestions, I'd favor the withfile option, it would be both more powerful, and doesn't introduce the problem of trying

[PATCH] expand debugging options to provide tracing of call to $(eval and $(call

/make-3.82.lo_trace.patch?id=a4f03f17f42ded70e6a3c49cf4e9a90eaf3c12ca In the spirit of 'pushing upstream', I submit this patch here, under GPLv3+ terms. Regards, Norbert Thiebaud Below is an example of output produced by this patch: [...] ### call $(gb_Library_set_include) -- ### arg 0