[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Fwd: Suggestion about derived files and commands
From: |
Wayne Scott |
Subject: |
Re: Fwd: Suggestion about derived files and commands |
Date: |
Fri, 27 Apr 2001 08:54:54 -0700 |
From: Dominique Dumont <address@hidden>
> Furthermore, the "memoize like" feature has one other benefit:
> If cons recognize that the derived file to be produced is the same as
> the current derived file, there not need to follow the dependancies
> anymore for this file.
>
> This could save quite some time in some cases.
This is the benefit I was refering to with the derived object
signature patch.
Yes avoiding storing two copies in the cache is a good thing, but
cons' cache right now is dead simple. Extra complexity is a bad
thing. Also since the cache only stores hard links, the only thing in
the cache that lives longer that a day or so are files that are
currently being used by some developer.
-Wayne
- Fwd: Suggestion about derived files and commands, Rajesh Vaidheeswarran, 2001/04/26
- Re: Suggestion about derived files and commands, Frank Thomas, 2001/04/27
- Re: Fwd: Suggestion about derived files and commands, Steven Knight, 2001/04/27
- Re: Fwd: Suggestion about derived files and commands, Wayne Scott, 2001/04/27
- Re: Fwd: Suggestion about derived files and commands, Dominique Dumont, 2001/04/27
- Re: Fwd: Suggestion about derived files and commands, Steven Knight, 2001/04/27
- Re: Fwd: Suggestion about derived files and commands, Brad Garcia, 2001/04/27
- Re: Fwd: Suggestion about derived files and commands, Wayne Scott, 2001/04/27
- RE: Fwd: Suggestion about derived files and commands, Greg Spencer, 2001/04/27
- Re: Fwd: Suggestion about derived files and commands, Rajesh Vaidheeswarran, 2001/04/27
- Re: Fwd: Suggestion about derived files and commands, Brad Garcia, 2001/04/27