4 ms·
Unless I'm misreading your description though, the problem is that "a build that does nothing", or "a build that does very little" is absolutely a real world bu
by aseipp 6y ago
Unless I'm misreading your description though, the problem is that "a build that does nothing", or "a build that does very little" is absolutely a real world build, because it's almost exactly what happens when you do incremental recompilation. It's one of the most common cases you would encounter.
- bb88 6y agoSure, but re-linking was the big factor, or god forbid you touched a header file that was used in 400 code units -- or your ccache corrupted itself, or you changed your compiler flags (which would force ccache to recompile everything anyway). As much as I don't like programming golang, they did get compilation right. And Scons/ninja/automake/cmake issues just went away.
- barumi 6y ago> or god forbid you touched a header file that was used in 400 code units In C/C++ that means you decided to change 400 translation units. That's not a problem with the build system at all. That's a problem with how the developers working on the project failed to follow basic best-practices in software development. No build system saves you from the mess you create yourself.