Incremental builds?

[PauloPinto]

On Friday, 27 September 2013 at 06:40:22 UTC, Jacob Carlborg 
wrote:
> On 2013-09-27 01:47, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>
>> Fast enough that you'd have to have a very large project for 
>> incremental
>> builds to gain you anything. Maybe you could gain time if the 
>> incremental
>> builds were done in parallel, but even then, the build time is 
>> going to be
>> dwarfed by the link time in a lot of programs. Most projects 
>> aren't going to
>> be big enough to really gain much from incremental builds. I'd 
>> only worry
>> about that if I were doing a large application and building it 
>> was
>> demonstratively slow.
>
> I don't know how others think about incremental compilation. 
> But I'm don't think about compiling each file separately. I'm 
> thinking about compiling only what's changed and compile all 
> those files in one go.
>
> That would mean the first time you compile a project it would 
> compile all files at once, just as most people do today. Then 
> when some files are changed it will only compile those, in one 
> go.
>
> This should at least in theory speed up the compilation. But 
> perhaps most projects are too small to actually make a 
> difference in practice.


 From my enterprise seat, I tend to favor compilation against 
binary modules.

It is not as if you have always source code available and D has 
modules, so I expect eventually to make use of binary modules 
like in most languages that have module support.


--
Paulo