On 8/8/12 12:36 PM, Nicolas Silva wrote:
On 08/08/2012 02:27 PM, Benjamin Smedberg wrote:
On 8/8/2012 2:09 PM, Nicolas Silva wrote:
Hi dev-platform,
I spent some time looking at include dependencies lately, and I think
it is an area where we can improve our code without too much effort.
Bad include dependencies lead to slower builds.
What kind of evidence do we have for this? Before spending time
tinkering with removing includes, I think we need to understand
whether it's worth it: unless there is a clear and significant
improvement, there are many other things we could be doing which are
probably more valuable. And if there are significant wins to be had,
should we instead be considering using module-wide includes and
precompiled headers?
--BDS
That's the thing, it is hard to measure the impact of bad dependencies
unless you compare the same code with bad and good dependencies (which
would mean spending the time to fix existing code), or have already
experienced it in another project, or even trust what people say on the
internet about this subject.
I concur.
Right now I think our build times could benefit more from a better build
system than fixing our include dependencies, if you ask me.
Yes. Although, compiling C/C++/Obj-C is our #1 CPU consumer by far. We
spend more time compiling than we do in build system clownshoes.
Anything we can do to prevent unnecessary rebuilds (like reducing
include dependency proliferation which invalidates more targets than it
should) or to make the compiler execute faster (perhaps less reliance on
templates or using precompiler headers) would be a huge win.
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
