Re: [Raypp-general] Makefile

[Tim M. <ti...@se...>]

On Sunday 07 Nov 2004 15:29, Martin Reinecke wrote:
> Well, the main reason was that the compilation of the big translation unit
> is very fast compared to separate compilation of all source files.
> This is the case because each source file includes quite a lot of
> large standard library headers, which dominate the compiled lines of code.
> With separate compilation they need to be parsed many times.
> Of course this argument is not valid if you edit only one source file and
> recompile.

A brief and rather unscientific investigation into the relative times 
convinced me that a one-off full compile is indeed much quicker when done as 
a single translation unit. However, it seems to me that the average user of 
raypp is going to compile quite a few times, as people aren't going to be 
using it out of the box as-is.

Furthermore, it seems to me that we want to avoid wasting time during the 
development cycle (when you usually have nothing better to do than sit and 
wait for a build) even at the expense of it taking longer for people to do a 
one-off build.

I think a reasonable compromise would be to build multiple translation units 
in the CVS, but possibly release tarballs with the fast compile switched on. 
Any thoughts?

> But in this case all the dependency rules must be regenerated, 
> which also takes some time.

Isn't that the job of make to worry about? I mean, its algorithms are 
impenetrable but once you get it set up there isn't a problem.

> > Does anyone object to me submitting this?
>
> Could you please upload it as a sourceforge patch first?

I didn't know this was possible. I'll have to tidy up the makefile a bit and 
investigate how to achieve building a sourceforge patch.

Tim