Re: multi-threaded compiling

[alex xmb sw ratchev]

On Wed, Mar 13, 2024, 08:26 Mischa Baars <mjbaars1977.backup@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 10:00 PM Paul Smith <psmith@gnu.org> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2024-03-12 at 13:37 +0100, Mischa Baars wrote:
> > > > I'd still like to hear why you aren't simply using "make -j".
> > >
> > > That's because I don't want to define static compile and link targets
> > > for every new project I start. The Makefile in question contains only
> > > a few lines of code and some environment variables, but works on
> > > every new project as long as you follow certain guidelines regarding
> > > the directory structure. It scans, compiles and links on the fly.
> >
> > I don't find this argument compelling.  It's relatively straightforward
> > to create a makefile environment that "works on every new project as
> > long as you follow certain guidelines regarding the directory
> > structure" while still using parallel builds, that will "scan, compile,
> > and link" on the fly, using things like the wildcard function, pattern
> > rules, etc.
> >
> > You are merely trading a bit of extra complexity in your makefile for a
> > whole lot of complexity and tricky hacking in bash, as can be seen by
> > following this thread.
> >
>
> Only the Makefile is functional right now. The bash script is not working.
> Good enough to reduce compile time from 1:43 to 0:10. I would have liked to
> see the script working.
>

u said u have fs naming conventions
write em up here , i make the bash ( not sh )

But if you prefer to re-invent make's parallel build capabilities in
> > bash, certainly that's your prerogative.
> >
>