Tor Lillqvist wrote: > (Sounds like a potentially good idea to me; I never fully > understood the logic of having the separate "product" vs. > "non-product" build dichotomy, and the one time I tried a > "non-product" build it failed miserably anyway.) > > If we do this, can we then get rid of the ".pro" sufffix on the > build directories, too, please? > Hm, no really strong opinion on that one, but at least this is the rationale - a non-product build is there to have compile-time extra debug / sanity checks in it, like for example stlport debug - and individual stuff, usually specific to subsystems or applications.
At least for the code that I know, those have been proven quite helpful at times, nicely complementing valgrind (by e.g. pointing out mem clobberage that went into already-allocated areas, and was thus not noticed by valgrind). And for me, --enable-dbgutil builds, on the platform I work on. Now, you prolly don't want this debug code shipped, since it adds substantial overhead (at times) - ideally, we'd have unit tests for all those things now handled by in-line debug code, but we're not quite there yet, so I'd be a bit reluctant with axing non-pro ... My 2 cents, -- Thorsten
pgpgjbfSdGOJM.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
