|
| From: | Ergus |
| Subject: | Re: Compilation speed |
| Date: | Wed, 19 Aug 2020 14:37:52 +0200 |
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 11:43:05AM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 11:25:37AM +0200, Mario Lang wrote:Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> writes: > On 8/6/20 8:20 AM, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote: > >> And then ./configure takes 19 seconds, and that's fully single-threaded, >> I believe? And... I'm guessing there's no way to get that to be >> multi-threaded?[...]The "speed" of autoconf is probably the reason why its adoption rate is falling. I remember insisting on using autoconf for many years, just because. Until I figured out CMake 3.x. I will never write an autoconf script again, never.I used to consider CMake as "just another build system, why not". Until I saw its cross-compilation story. Since then, I appreciate autoconf even more.
I do cross compilation in CMake almost daily and I actually have very few complains. It is extremely simple and it has "A syntax to rule them all". And other "extras" like cpack, ctest, ccmake, the finders (with the same syntax) or the CMAKE_EXPORT_COMPILE_COMMANDS option to generato compilation database for clang. The only real issue for me in CMake is that there is not a log where I can see quickly the configuration command I used on yesterday. OTOH, in emacs CMake is not an option because gnulib does not give any support for it (developers policy). Which in my opinion is bad for gnulib because CMake use is growing.
| [Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |