Re: [Boost-build] [BULK] Re: Sharing is caring: Visual Studio ->bjam

From: Sohail Somani (s.somani_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-16 13:52:34

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-build-bounces_at_[hidden] 
> [mailto:boost-build-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of 
> Alex Besogonov
> Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 10:26 AM
> To: boost-build_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [Boost-build] [BULK] Re: Sharing is caring: 
> Visual Studio ->bjam
> 
> David Abrahams wrote:
> >> Really? You find bjam recompilation to be slower than 
> Visual Studio?
> > It shouldn't be surprising.  An IDE will always have an 
> advantage, at
> > least if you use that IDE to edit files, because it can 
> begin deciding
> > what to do the moment you save a file.
> But it should not be an order of magnitude :)
> 
> Dependency tracking in Windows is pretty slow in BJam because NTFS is 
> slow. It takes 7 seconds to initialize BJam in Windows on my 
> machine but 
> only 1.5 seconds in Linux.
> 
> I think we can optimize BJam's dependency tracking by using "change 
> journal" in Windows. And it doesn't even require a resident change 
> tracker process.

So under which Windows versions will this apply? If that's all it is,
sounds like something straightforward doesn't it :)