tech-userlevel archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: asynchronous make(1), anyone?

On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 11:38:08PM -0500, David Young wrote:
 > >  > > [various scenarios that break the idea]
 > >  > 
 > >  > If the programmer has to be careful about order of saves, then it's not
 > >  > a robust solution.
 > >  >
 > >  > [...]
 > >  > 
 > >  > A robust solution has to deal with this.
 > > 
 > > While we might like to live in a universe where build environments are
 > > constructed with ponies and rainbows, I don't think we actually do.
 > That's not very helpful, is it?

Neither is it particularly helpful to reply to concerns about
fundamental aspects of an idea by dismissing them as implementation

Your proposal is that the compiler should immediately start building
anything I save, but somehow it has to avoid choking or distracting me
if it reads a half-written save file, or if I've made linked changes to
a number of files and save them in the wrong order, or if I've simply
saved something out of the editor that's uncompilable because I'm not
done hacking on it yet.

It seems to me that there's inherently a *PONY HAPPENS* step required
in the middle there.

David A. Holland

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index