3 ms·
I've never noticed the "quadratic" build time increase you mention, so I did a test[0]. Files in size from 1mb to 50mb, 3 trials each. These are the results, an
by KMnO4 7y ago
I've never noticed the "quadratic" build time increase you mention, so I did a test[0]. Files in size from 1mb to 50mb, 3 trials each. These are the results, and they look absolutely linear[1].
[0]: https://pastebin.com/Z9329xkc https://pastebin.com/Z9329xkc
[1]: https://i.imgur.com/I3XSBDg.png https://i.imgur.com/I3XSBDg.png
- RealityVoid 7y agoNice, I love it when people actually try it out. In the end, I much prefer the method outlined in the article, less processing overall, no need to transform it into an array nor compile the array into an object afterwards. You just skip 2 steps and bring it to an object directly!
- hikarudo 7y agoI stand corrected! I shouldn't have guessed "quadratic" without measuring. Large files will make gcc use more memory, and if you're building on a low-RAW machine, the OS will start to swap. That's probably the effect I saw. Nothing to do with "quadratic" compilation time.