tooling quality and some random rant

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2011-02-13 13:24, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Peter Alexander"<peter.alexander.au at gmail.com>  wrote in message
> news:ij8a8p$2gqv$1 at digitalmars.com...
>> On 13/02/11 10:10 AM, Peter Alexander wrote:
>>> On 13/02/11 6:52 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>>> D compiles a few orders of magnitude faster than C++ does. Better
>>>> handling
>>>> of incremental building might be nice for really large projects, but
>>>> it's
>>>> really not a big issue for D, not like it is for C++.
>>>
>>> The only person I know that's worked on large D projects is Tomasz, and
>>> he claimed that he was getting faster compile times in C++ due to being
>>> able to do incremental builds.
>>>
>>> "Walter might claim that DMD is fast, but it’s not exactly blazing when
>>> you confront it with a few hundred thousand lines of code. With C/C++,
>>> you’d split your source into .c and .h files, which mean that a
>>> localized change of a .c file only requires the compilation of a single
>>> unit. Take an incremental linker as well, and C++ compiles faster than
>>> D. With D you often have the situation of having to recompile everything
>>> upon the slightest change." (http://h3.gd/devlog/?p=22)
>>
>> Turns out this may have been solved:
>> https://bitbucket.org/h3r3tic/xfbuild/wiki/Home
>
> The problem that xfbuild ended up running into is that DMD puts the
> generated code for instantiated temples into an unpredictable object file.
> This leads to situations where certain functions end up being lost from the
> object files unless you do a full rebuild. Essentialy it breaks incremental
> compilation. There's a detailed explanation of it somewhere on the xfbuild
> site.

Walter has said in a thread here that if you build with the -lib option 
it will output all templates into all object files.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg