Re: [pygccxml-development] Comments on module_builder cache functionality

[Roman Y. <rom...@gm...>]

On 8/29/06, Allen Bierbaum <al...@vr...> wrote:
> >Actually, if you change any text in implementation_details.h it will
> >rebuild the cache because the md5 hash will catch it.

Your code does not contains the check.

> >
> >As I said on IM though there are changes that both of them miss.
> >
> >The thing that both cache implementations miss is that if a file
> >included by to_be_exported.h changes, then the caches will be invalid
> >but they will not know it.

This is an open source project. I claim that pygccxml.parser.file_cache_t
class will not miss.

> >I have seen this problem before in the pygccxml cache and there is
> >really no good way around it.  The only way that pygccxml has to get a
> >full list of dependent header files (ie. build a recursive list of
> >includes)

GCCXML does it.

> >What both of these bugs mean is that it is possible to make a change in
> >your code and have it not get picked up.

pygccxml does not contain this bug.

> >One hybrid solution that may work is that we could add an optional
> >parameter to the module builder that is a list of "dependent" headers
> >that the user cares about checking.

In pygccxml this workds out of the box.

-- 
Roman Yakovenko
C++ Python language binding
http://www.language-binding.net/