English version
Accueil     Ŕ propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis ŕ jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml ŕ l'adresse ocaml.org.

Browse thread
ocamlbuild & deps
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2009-02-20 (16:32)
From: Daniel_Bünzli <daniel.buenzli@e...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocamlbuild & deps

Le 20 févr. 09 ŕ 16:39, Romain Bardou a écrit :

> 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.

Heu no. If B cannot be built then the compilation of A stops and the  
compilation of your project stops.

It is however true that if A has a dependency on a heavy C in parallel  
to B you'll have to wait for the end of C. But even in this case, it's  
just a matter of calling 'build' with B and C in a sensible order (and  
not in parallel).