Hey,
2013/12/24 Muhammad Bashir Al-Noimi <[email protected]>
> On 12/24/2013 06:42 PM, Randy Yates wrote:
> > I too have experienced longish compile times with wt. I have the
> > suspicion that it is mainly due to the complex, muli-level headers. Is
> > there a way to precompile the headers?
> +1
>
> It's not really a big problem for me, but it would be nice to get
> > a rebuild done in, say, 10 seconds instead of 60.
> For me I found it a big deal specially when you compare it with
> transitional web SDKs (parser based such php or python) or desktop SDKs
> (Qt compile time much faster than Wt)
It would be great to indeed get rid of some of the design choices we made
which cause these long compile times. They can be mostly (except for
Wt::Dbo) be attributed to the dependency on boost::signal in our public
API. Eventually, we will want to provide our own implementation of signal
since boost::signal is more complicated than what Wt requires.
There is no inherent reason that Wt should build slower than Qt (a single
file may build a bit slower due to template-based signals, but there is no
requirement on moc so the number of files to build also decreases).
However, you cannot expect that a C++ library will be as quick to build as
php or python.
Regards,
koen
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT
organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance
affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your
Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
witty-interest mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/witty-interest
