From: Romain Bardou <Romain.Bardou@lri.fr>
To: "Daniel Bünzli" <daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch>
Cc: OCaml List <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocamlbuild & deps
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 16:39:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <499ECEB7.6010709@lri.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <B8A20154-A833-4AC7-98B4-BAC413DFB259@erratique.ch>
> Am I right in thinking that in rule specifications we could get rid of
> the ~dep(s) parameter of rules and have all deps be specified/discovered
> dynamically via the 'build' argument ? Otherwise stated is ~dep(s) just
> an optimization ?
>
> Out of curiosity any idea in the cost of suppressing these arguments
> (i.e. was that road actually followed at some point) ?
>
> If the answer to the first question is yes. Then I think the
> documentation could be made clearer by stating that what is asked to be
> built by the 'build' argument is considered as dependencies. However if
> you know some deps statically you can specify them as dep(s) argument
> this will just implicitely add them to the list given to the 'build'
> argument.
I think there is a difference. It is indeed an optimization issue but
not at the level of Ocamlbuild itself : it is as the level of your
compilation process. If A *dynamically* depends on B, and your whole
project (say, 10 hours of compilation) depends on A, but you have no way
to build B, then Ocamlbuild will start to compile your project until it
finds out that A cannot be built (maybe several hours later). If B had
been put as a ~dep, then Ocamlbuild would not even had started building
the project in the first place, saving you a lot of time.
Well, at least that's how I understand it ;)
--
Romain Bardou
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-20 15:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-20 14:01 Daniel Bünzli
2009-02-20 15:39 ` Romain Bardou [this message]
2009-02-20 16:31 ` [Caml-list] " Daniel Bünzli
2009-02-21 18:53 ` Romain Bardou
2009-02-21 20:19 ` Daniel Bünzli
2009-02-21 20:23 ` Daniel Bünzli
2009-02-26 13:04 ` Daniel Bünzli
2009-03-02 13:43 ` Daniel Bünzli
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=499ECEB7.6010709@lri.fr \
--to=romain.bardou@lri.fr \
--cc=caml-list@yquem.inria.fr \
--cc=daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox