On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 4:51 PM, Dirk Bächle <tshor...@gmx.de> wrote:
> This idea may be feasible, but I'd rather try to get the actual shell > spawning to be as fast as possible. We have some valid approaches for this, > so let's try them out...maybe one of them is fast enough, such that we > don't have to care about the "extra" work mentioned above anymore. Speeding > up the spawn/fork stuff would be more transparent to the user than trying > to "detect" which commands need a full shell and which don't. > They're orthogonal. Both useful, but either can be pursued independently of the other. Avoiding shells will be most valuable in builds with lots of tiny commands (could halve the build time). Avoiding fork is most valuable when SCons is using lots of memory (which it often is). My sense, based largely on Dirk's research, is fixing spawn has a bigger payoff right now. -- Gary
_______________________________________________ Scons-dev mailing list Scons-dev@scons.org http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
