Mark A. Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The only reason I didn't define an optimize attribute originally is > because I couldn't decide what level of optimization it should do. > Should it be a lvl thing like 1-5 and then each compiler adapter > determines what flags that corresponds to?
Hmm, how about symbolic names? optimize="none", optimze="some", optimize="memory", optimize="aggressive" ... > Agreed. Maybe we make GCC the default since a port of it exists on > nearly every platform? Would like comments from the group on this > one. should read all mails before I start to comment 8-) > The only further questions I have are about our handling of > libraries. How will we handle libraries when the object file(s) are > newer then those contained within the library we built? Do we just > update the library, or completely rebuild the library? This is similar to "do we update a jar or do we recreate it from scratch". It depends on the overhead, in the jar case recreating the jar is faster than updating it most of the time - but we'll probably have the option to update it in the next release of Ant. Stefan
