compile.c: compile_on(): Why search()?

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-11-18 10:39:48

erhaps we should investigate this...

 --=-=-= Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

X-From-Line: bonefish_at_[hidden] Mon Nov 18 16:18:34 2002
Return-Path: <jamming-admin_at_[hidden]>
Received: from mr04.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.23] [207.172.4.23])
by fep01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with ESMTP
id
<20021118154408.YYHB27104.fep01.mrf.mail.rcn.net_at_[hidden]>;
Mon, 18 Nov 2002 10:44:08 -0500
Received: from mx07.mrf.mail.rcn.net (mx07.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.56])
by mr04.mrf.mail.rcn.net (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.2.1-GA)
with ESMTP id ACZ65208;
Mon, 18 Nov 2002 10:44:11 -0500 (EST)
Received: from wireless.perforce.com ([209.209.60.41]
helo=frankenrouter.perforce.com)
by mx07.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #4)
id 18Do4E-0003lA-00
for david.abrahams_at_[hidden]; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 10:44:06 -0500
Received: from fxp1 (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by frankenrouter.perforce.com (8.12.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gAIFQ5pe059185;
Mon, 18 Nov 2002 07:26:05 -0800 (PST)
(envelope-from jamming-admin_at_[hidden])
Received: from mail.cs.tu-berlin.de (root_at_[hidden]
[130.149.17.13])
by frankenrouter.perforce.com (8.12.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gAIFOIpe059134
for <jamming_at_[hidden]>; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 07:24:22 -0800 (PST)
(envelope-from bonefish_at_[hidden])
Received: from platon.cs.tu-berlin.de (bonefish_at_[hidden]
[130.149.25.107])
by mail.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA24646
for <jamming_at_[hidden]>; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 16:18:35 +0100 (MET)
Received: (from bonefish_at_localhost)
by platon.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA20013;
Mon, 18 Nov 2002 16:18:34 +0100 (MET)
From: Ingo Weinhold <bonefish_at_[hidden]>
To: jamming_at_[hidden]
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.4.44.0211181543580.19429-100000_at_[hidden]>
Subject: [jamming] compile.c: compile_on(): Why search()?
Sender: jamming-admin_at_[hidden]
Errors-To: jamming-admin_at_[hidden]
X-BeenThere: jamming_at_[hidden]
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.4
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:jamming-request_at_[hidden]?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:jamming_at_[hidden]>
List-Subscribe: <http://maillist.perforce.com/mailman/listinfo/jamming>,
<mailto:jamming-request_at_[hidden]?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: Discuss the build tool Jam/MR with other users
<jamming.perforce.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://maillist.perforce.com/mailman/listinfo/jamming>,
<mailto:jamming-request_at_[hidden]?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://maillist.perforce.com/pipermail/jamming/>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 16:18:34 +0100 (MET)
X-Content-Length: 769
Lines: 23
Xref: NEFARIOUS mail.misc:9011
MIME-Version: 1.0

Hi,

I'm currently doing a bit of profiling to optimize a rather large build
system. And while doing so, I stumbled over the following line in
compile_on():

t->boundname = search( t->name, &t->time );

Why would one do that? I somehow suspect, that it is an unneeded leftover
from copying and pasting compile_include(). At least the unchanged comment
for `parse->left' (preceding the function definition) seems to support
that suspicion.

For search() causes disk access (one or more timestamp()s), excessive
use of on target rule execution can result in a significantly decreased
build system performance.

CU, Ingo

_______________________________________________
jamming mailing list - jamming_at_[hidden]
http://maillist.perforce.com/mailman/listinfo/jamming

 --=-=-= 

-- 
David Abrahams
dave_at_[hidden] * http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost support, enhancements, training, and commercial distribution
 --=-=-=--