From: Toon Knapen (toon.knapen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-12-16 17:49:44
Vladimir Prus wrote:
> To be able to try different approaches quickly, I need to have testcases I can
> play with locally, without waiting for fresh profiles from users. It's best
> to test on Boost.Build setup used on real projects.
> I'd also appreciate information about time "bjam -n" takes on your project and
> hardware details (CPU, memory size, disk speed).
I have reworked (again) all my jamfiles (well actually most of them are
generated by a python script) and now I think my Jamfiles are pretty
clean and use boost-build in a correct way.
I just timed a bjam -n and on an old machine (PIII 633Mhz) this takes
199.5 real and 178.27s user time. I also tried the same on the real
project (where the sources files are not empty) and I was surprised that
it took about as much time (201.89s real and 175.61 user time). This
would indicate that parsing all files to follow all #includes would
alsmost take no time (or does the -n option disable that?). Also the
same test on a athlon1900 takes 114s real and 106s user-time.
I'll send the test-case tomorrow.
Boost-Build list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk