This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Suggestion for option
- To: mark at codesourcery dot com (Mark Mitchell)
- Subject: Re: Suggestion for option
- From: Joern Rennecke <amylaar at redhat dot com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 23:04:36 +0100 (BST)
- Cc: amylaar at redhat dot com (Joern Rennecke),rjvbertin at hotmail dot com (RenE J.V. Bertin),gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org (gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org)
> Your hapless computer does not go on to the next file and start compiling
> that while it is sitting there waiting for this one to finish. And
Well, it won't do that anyways with a standard make file when you have an
error.
> yes, I have seen GCC spend half an hour optimizing a file that it issued
> an error message about. And if you can use parallel make, which you can't
> always, your messages come out interleaved. And if you are on a machine
So with the proposed change your messages will come out interleaved even
more quickly. How is that easier to read?
> where CPU cycles are precious (yes, such machines exist, I routinely
> compile on large multi-user systems), you are wasting them.
IMHO this is the only situation where the proposed behaviour actually
gains you something.