Re: [boost] Testing Boost

From: Douglas Gregor (doug.gregor_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-04 22:44:16

On Jun 4, 2007, at 9:05 PM, Gennadiy Rozental wrote:

>
> "Douglas Gregor" <doug.gregor_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> news:6C59A26A-304C-49F8-9559-C0DE31B44163_at_osl.iu.edu...
>>
>> On Jun 4, 2007, at 8:37 PM, Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
>>> "Rene Rivera" <grafikrobot_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>>> news:4664AFB4.8050008_at_gmail.com...
>>>> Because the compiled products, the obj, lib, dll, and exe are
>>>> huge. They
>>>> are huge because it's C++ and has a large amount of debugging  
>>>> symbol
>>>> data, because templates generate log type names.
>>>
>>> Why do we keep these once test is completed?
>>
>> Because when some small number of files change in Boost, we only want
>> to rebuild those objects, libraries, and executables that are
>> actually affected. That's what would give us improved turnaround time
>> from commit to test results.
>
> Umm.. This looks like an area we can enhance. Can't we keep last  
> revision
> number/last update time along with results?

I don't believe this is possible, and nothing short of an actual,  
working implementation of this idea would convince me otherwise.  
Build/test systems have always worked this way for a very good  
reason: the only way to avoid re-building something when it hasn't  
changed is to keep it around. Most of those intermediate files are  
needed again for minimal rebuilds.

        - Doug