4 ms·
If minor changes trigger long compilation, there is something wrong with your code organization. I found that if you count linking time the total build time dif
by vicaya 17y ago
If minor changes trigger long compilation, there is something wrong with your code organization. I found that if you count linking time the total build time difference between c and c++ for significant project is not that big at least not at 10-20x.
There are plenty of gdb macros that support stl containers even 18 months ago.
LLVM is also written in C++ for good reasons.
- wheels 17y agoIf minor changes trigger long compilation, there is something wrong with your code organization A lot of larger C++ projects use "pimpl" for this reason (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opaque_pointer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opaque_pointer). Also in professional projects with large code bases that I've worked on in the past we've always had a distributed compilation environment (distcc, icecream, etc.)
- vicaya 17y agoIn a lot of cases, just use forward declarations to avoid unnecessary includes in the header files goes a long way.
- gcv 17y agoI tried some of those gdb macros, but they did not work for me. Don't remember the details. In any case, in a recent debugging session, I noticed that gdb elides or loses some essential iterator features. For example, iterator->first and ->second do not show up if I execute the "p" command in gdb. The whole situation led me to claim that, at least in open-source Unixland, the C++ toolchain leaves a great deal to be desired.