Mailing-List: contact ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Message-ID: <20001031150747.14905.qmail@web2303.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 07:07:47 -0800 (PST)
From: Simeon Fitch <metasim@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: simeon@fitch.net
Subject: Re: Ant build times was Re: Some Thoughts on Ant 1.3 and 2.0
To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


--- Ken Wood <kwood@i2.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Simeon Fitch wrote:
> 
> > I think the real argument for this is speed. If it
> > will make loading and running Ant faster I think
> it
> > should be considered. My builds with Ant are still
> > much slower than they were with make.
> >
> 
> Wow, that really stunned me!  I moved our stuff
> from an Imakefile/Makefile based system to Ant,
> and saw great improvement. One part of our
> system used to take 1 hr 15min to compile in the
> Makefile based system, and takes 7 minutes
> to compile using Ant. It has 2158 source files...
> 

I guess I should have qualified it some. On small
builds with ~100 files running jikes on Linux with JDK
1.2.2, my make based system still wins. It's a hand
crafted set of makefiles; no Imake or automake stuff.
A lot of the win is in startup time.

Simeon

=====
mailto:simeon@fitch.net

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf!  It's FREE.
http://im.yahoo.com/