Re: Incremental Compilation

"Jan Gray" <jsgray@acm.org.nospam>
25 Nov 1999 01:49:16 -0500

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[2 earlier articles]
Re: Incremental compilation wright@gefion.cs.rice.edu (1992-01-23)
Re: Incremental compilation ltd@netcom.netcom.com (1992-01-24)
Incremental Compilation shure@sd.co.il (Alexander Rozenman) (1999-11-02)
Re: Incremental Compilation xenophon@irtnog.org (Matthew Economou) (1999-11-03)
Re: Incremental Compilation maratb@CS.Berkeley.EDU (Marat Boshernitsan) (1999-11-05)
Re: Incremental Compilation bowdidge@apple.com (Robert Bowdidge) (1999-11-16)
Re: Incremental Compilation jsgray@acm.org.nospam (Jan Gray) (1999-11-25)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "Jan Gray" <jsgray@acm.org.nospam>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 25 Nov 1999 01:49:16 -0500
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 99-11-015 99-11-068
Keywords: incremental

Robert Bowdidge wrote in message 99-11-068...
>(Even though I no longer work for IBM, I can't seem to get away from
>flogging their products...)


Though I no longer work at Microsoft, I still play apologist.


>Microsoft's Visual C++ is not an incremental compiler.


I respectfully disagree. For example,


* after a source file edit, "incremental compilation" (-Gi) skips most
unchanged functions, reusing results of previous compilations.


* after a header edit, "minimal rebuild" (-Gm) skips compilation of most
files which include the header but do not depend upon the changes made to
the header. (This feature helps address most of the class library header
edits that Mr. Bowdidge mentioned.)


* after any edit, "edit and continue" (-ZI) rebuilds and continues
debugging, usually without restarting the debug target.


Jan Gray

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.