Hello,
After a good night's sleep, I think I've found a way to write down more
clearly the rationale that motivates me.
It's about the semantics gcc can derive from the command line arguments.
It's a very efficient way of specifying about the desired result of the
compilation, but less about
I'm more relying on a hunch right now, than on a sound analysis. Maybe I'm
wrong...
I have to take a closer look at how ccache proceeds to speed up compilation
and precisely at how gcc internally uses I/O functions, to be more
articulate on the subject.
Maybe I could slowly and publicly form
"Franck Z" writes:
> In your opinion, could it be of any use in the project if I tried to
> merge ccache into gcc, so as to assess this "intelligent agent"
> approach ?
I didn't really understand your description, but there have been a
couple of gcc projects in this general space: compiler serve
In your opinion, could it be of any use in the project if I tried to merge
ccache into gcc, so as to assess this "intelligent agent" approach ?
I can't really tell if, as for an underlying object-oriented structure that
is already present for serialization technique in gcc's source code, despit
Thank you very much!
ccache really looks like it will address my problem. I'm trying it. I'm also
quite relieved not to have to dig into the source of "make". It looked
scary!
Thanks also for the information about gcc-in-cxx. It puzzled me not to
understand why it didn't show "class" struct
On 13 June 2011 10:44, Franck Z wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to ask the developpers' community about an idea that interests
> me these days.
>
> It comes from the fact that the compilation time when I try to run the
> "make" command on the source code for gcc is too long for the configuration
>
