[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: PCH support
From: |
Olaf van der Spek |
Subject: |
Re: PCH support |
Date: |
Sun, 25 Dec 2011 17:10:20 +0100 |
On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Miles Bader <address@hidden> wrote:
> Dave Hart <address@hidden> writes:
>> True, but most C/C++ #includes orders of magnitudes more lines than
>> they contain themselves, so assuming the source code is rearranged to
>> have a "precomp.h" containing the bulk of #includes, the compile will
>> be notably faster.
>
> Faster enough to be worth the annoyance for the developer of twisting
> his source code to fit the "pch style" (which seems notably uglier)?
Yes
I'm not sure what twisting you're referring too though.
> Machines are very fast these days,
Build times are still too long.
> and even using tons of big headers,
> C++ parsing doesn't seem such a big deal as it maybe used to.
> [AFAICT, slow compilation seems far more often connected with
Did you benchmark PCH?
--
Olaf
- PCH support, Olaf van der Spek, 2011/12/23
- Re: PCH support, Stefano Lattarini, 2011/12/23
- Re: PCH support, Warren Young, 2011/12/23
- Re: PCH support, Stefano Lattarini, 2011/12/23
- Re: PCH support, Dave Hart, 2011/12/23
- Re: PCH support, Stefano Lattarini, 2011/12/23
- Re: PCH support, Olaf van der Spek, 2011/12/23
- Re: PCH support, Miles Bader, 2011/12/25
- Re: PCH support,
Olaf van der Spek <=
- Re: PCH support, Miles Bader, 2011/12/25
- Re: PCH support, Olaf van der Spek, 2011/12/25
- Re: PCH support, Miles Bader, 2011/12/25
- Re: PCH support, Olaf van der Spek, 2011/12/25
- Re: PCH support, Olaf van der Spek, 2011/12/23
Re: PCH support, Olaf van der Spek, 2011/12/23