[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Texmacs-dev] Current work, nogencc and tree in generic programming
From: |
Joris van der Hoeven |
Subject: |
Re: [Texmacs-dev] Current work, nogencc and tree in generic programming |
Date: |
Sun, 28 Apr 2002 18:55:21 +0200 (MET DST) |
> > This is not very logical
>
> That is indeed a bit dirty. The problem is that it uses gmake features
> for automatic dependences resolution.
>
> The gmake info documentation (node: How Makefiles Are Remade) says:
>
> To this end, after reading in all makefiles, `make' will consider
> each as a goal target and attempt to update it.
>
> When first compiling from a clean distribution, the .d files are not
> present, so the first pass inclusion fails, and then the .d files are
> made.
>
> I will fix that by defining a "deps" target to create the .d files, and
> move the removal of those files (as well as the Objects/*.rpo files) in a
> new "maintainer-clean" target.
I'll wait; it should be possible to fix such problems by
cleverly using makefiles.
> > 2. The compilation time is much longer than before, even though we only
> > use -O2: this is bad.
>
> That is true. That is a problem with the stupid automatic template
> instanciation of g++2 (I do not know if g++3 is any smarter). A template
> is instanciated (its code is generated) at the point where it is first
> needed in a translation unit. This causes a lot of duplicate code
> generation. At link time, the collect wrapper recompiles the units as
> necessary until there is no duplicate code. The resulting information
> about where templates must be instanciated is stored in the Objects/*.rpo
> files, so subsequent compilations generate almost no duplicate code.
>
> We can speed up the compilation by moving the removal of the .rpo files
> to the maintainer-clean target.
>
> We could also increase the size of the compilation units, by compiling
> only .cc files containing only #include "xxx.cc" directives. However I
> find this solution way too hackish because it make the .cc files
It is hackish, but it really speeds up compilation a lot.
So this solution should probably be preferred;
it was part of the .gen.make files before anyway.
I *want* TeXmacs to compile reasonably fast.
- [Texmacs-dev] Current work, nogencc and tree in generic programming, David Allouche, 2002/04/27
- Re: [Texmacs-dev] Current work, nogencc and tree in generic programming, Joris van der Hoeven, 2002/04/27
- Re: [Texmacs-dev] Current work, nogencc and tree in generic programming, Joris van der Hoeven, 2002/04/28
- Re: [Texmacs-dev] Current work, nogencc and tree in generic programming, David Allouche, 2002/04/28
- Re: [Texmacs-dev] Current work, nogencc and tree in generic programming,
Joris van der Hoeven <=
- Re: [Texmacs-dev] Current work, nogencc and tree in generic programming, Stéphane Payrard, 2002/04/28
- Re: [Texmacs-dev] Current work, nogencc and tree in generic programming, Joris van der Hoeven, 2002/04/28
- Re: [Texmacs-dev] Current work, nogencc and tree in generic programming, David Allouche, 2002/04/28
- Re: [Texmacs-dev] Current work, nogencc and tree in generic programming, Joris van der Hoeven, 2002/04/29