ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dean Hiller <>
Subject Re: can't look archives - Ant for C??
Date Tue, 22 Apr 2003 16:02:08 GMT
thanks everyone for all the many responses.  They are greatly 
appreciated.  I will look into how much time is spent in make vs. how 
much in the compiler and look at the header files.

Dominique Devienne wrote:

>And I forgot to mention that C++ projects can be made to compile much faster
>by having clean header files... Way too often, compiling every single source
>file triggers the including of a plethora of header files, because of poor
>or lack of use of forward declarations in header instead of including
>another header, or not enough use of an opaque Impl classes (declared and
>implemented in the .cpp file) for the state of a class declared publicly.
>Only classes actually 'used' (i.e. not as pointer or references) require
>including their header files, since the class size if to be known!
>I have *seen* projects compiling 2/3 times faster after such refactorings.
>Look at the output of a makedepend run on your projects, and if your files
>all have dozens and dozens of includes each file depends on, then your
>likely suffering from the "header'it" disease... --DD
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Dominique Devienne [] 
>Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2003 10:40 AM
>To: 'Ant Users List'
>Subject: RE: can't look archives - Ant for C??
>Compiling native code just takes longer... Ant/CppTasks doesn't improve the
>build performance that much over makefiles, if at all. It's actually not
>what matters. What matters to me are:
>1) The excellent dependency analysis performed, on the sources and the
>compiler/linker command line for example (when an option is modified).
>2) The clear and easy XML definitions
>3) The cross-platform ability. To be honest, using GNU make is also
>cross-platform, probably even more so, but the options to be used on various
>platforms have to be conditionally declared. CppTasks does this in a much
>nicer way.
>4) Single type of build system in mixed Java/C++ projects.
>This is why CppTasks is so valuable to me. --DD
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Dean Hiller [] 
>Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2003 10:30 AM
>To: Ant Users List
>Subject: Re: can't look archives - Ant for C??
>No, not looking for a converter.  The program doesn't even need to be 
>written in C.  I just would like to be able to write  a build.xml file 
>and get rid of all the make files that are currently used.  I can do 
>that myself.  I don't mind.  Just need a program.  I will try the 
> and see what that has.  thanks Dominique for that info.
>    What I am hoping is this will speed up the build of our legacy 
>system.  I don't understand how it takes 5 hours to build a 50 meg 
>binary and I can build a 15 meg java binary in 10 minutes with ant.  I 
>think it has something to do with make files and the scripts.  I have a 
>feeling if those can be eliminated, the build can be improved 
>drastically.  The above statistics tell me the legacy is around 3.5 
>times bigger but takes 30 times as long to build.  Has anybody looked at 
>build performance before?
>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>For additional commands, e-mail:
>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message