autoconf
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: AC_REQUIRE problems


From: Paul Eggert
Subject: Re: AC_REQUIRE problems
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 20:53:30 -0800
User-agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux)

Dan Manthey <address@hidden> writes:

> I'm curious what is known about the speed of Make in comparison.

GNU make should be just as fast as the shell, if the subsidiary
commands are simple (which should be the case here).  In cases like
that, GNU make does a fork/exec, which is what the shell does.  The
downside of make is that (1) if the commands are complicated it
executes them via the shell and (2) results have to be stored in a
file.  The upside is that you get (1) dependency checking for free,
and (2) parallelism too if you're using GNU make.

>> > (2) Have you ever tried putting a here document in Make?
>>
>> That part could be done by the shell before invoking "make".
>       One of the major advantages of here documents is that they need
> never be explicitly named nor cleaned up.

"configure" already has a scheme for creating named documents that are
cleaned up automatically.  So that shouldn't be an issue.

>       Do you think that the comparatively small idea of handling
> dependencies with functions will have any speed benefits?

No, I'm afraid not.




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]