Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2019 20:36:37 +0000
* We're certainly aiming to get to a world where that secondary build graph layer is machine-managed and generated from source
Same here.
We (collectively) can’t improve our software engineering when are resistant to change.
-- Gaby
From: tooling-bounces_at_[hidden] <tooling-bounces_at_[hidden]> On Behalf Of Titus Winters
Sent: Friday, February 1, 2019 6:26 AM
To: WG21 Tooling Study Group SG15 <tooling_at_[hidden]>
Subject: Re: [Tooling] Modules
I mean, that's fair. :) We're certainly aiming to get to a world where that secondary build graph layer is machine-managed and generated from source.
On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 9:24 AM Bjarne Stroustrup <bjarne_at_[hidden]<mailto:bjarne_at_[hidden]>> wrote:
On 2/1/2019 9:20 AM, Boris Kolpackov wrote:
> Titus Winters <titus_at_[hidden]<mailto:titus_at_[hidden]>> writes:
>
>> We've been doing explicit statements of the dependency chain for our
>> codebase for almost 20 years, and I've literally never heard a new hire (or
>> anyone else) say it is a "huge" burden.
> The question is to what degree. I am sure you don't require new
> hires to manually specify for each translation unit dependencies
> on headers it includes, transitively?
>
> But that would sure make for a nice hazing ritual.
:-)
Seriously, having manual dependency specification is inherently
error-prone (independent double specification always is), as well as
extra work. The fact that it is manageable for someone somewhere doesn't
change that. I suspect its a skills, productivity, and scaling issue.
> _______________________________________________
> Tooling mailing list
> Tooling_at_[hidden]<mailto:Tooling_at_isocpp.open-std.org>
> http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/tooling<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.open-std.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ftooling&data=02%7C01%7Cgdr%40microsoft.com%7C27707f2934414f42ce0008d68851478d%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636846280011356365&sdata=pirF5zPPJPA1wTgzkQ57pG5Snu2w1FH3O0PLsRLKDw8%3D&reserved=0>
_______________________________________________
Tooling mailing list
Tooling_at_[hidden]<mailto:Tooling_at_[hidden]>
http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/tooling<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.open-std.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ftooling&data=02%7C01%7Cgdr%40microsoft.com%7C27707f2934414f42ce0008d68851478d%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636846280011356365&sdata=pirF5zPPJPA1wTgzkQ57pG5Snu2w1FH3O0PLsRLKDw8%3D&reserved=0>
Same here.
We (collectively) can’t improve our software engineering when are resistant to change.
-- Gaby
From: tooling-bounces_at_[hidden] <tooling-bounces_at_[hidden]> On Behalf Of Titus Winters
Sent: Friday, February 1, 2019 6:26 AM
To: WG21 Tooling Study Group SG15 <tooling_at_[hidden]>
Subject: Re: [Tooling] Modules
I mean, that's fair. :) We're certainly aiming to get to a world where that secondary build graph layer is machine-managed and generated from source.
On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 9:24 AM Bjarne Stroustrup <bjarne_at_[hidden]<mailto:bjarne_at_[hidden]>> wrote:
On 2/1/2019 9:20 AM, Boris Kolpackov wrote:
> Titus Winters <titus_at_[hidden]<mailto:titus_at_[hidden]>> writes:
>
>> We've been doing explicit statements of the dependency chain for our
>> codebase for almost 20 years, and I've literally never heard a new hire (or
>> anyone else) say it is a "huge" burden.
> The question is to what degree. I am sure you don't require new
> hires to manually specify for each translation unit dependencies
> on headers it includes, transitively?
>
> But that would sure make for a nice hazing ritual.
:-)
Seriously, having manual dependency specification is inherently
error-prone (independent double specification always is), as well as
extra work. The fact that it is manageable for someone somewhere doesn't
change that. I suspect its a skills, productivity, and scaling issue.
> _______________________________________________
> Tooling mailing list
> Tooling_at_[hidden]<mailto:Tooling_at_isocpp.open-std.org>
> http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/tooling<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.open-std.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ftooling&data=02%7C01%7Cgdr%40microsoft.com%7C27707f2934414f42ce0008d68851478d%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636846280011356365&sdata=pirF5zPPJPA1wTgzkQ57pG5Snu2w1FH3O0PLsRLKDw8%3D&reserved=0>
_______________________________________________
Tooling mailing list
Tooling_at_[hidden]<mailto:Tooling_at_[hidden]>
http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/tooling<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.open-std.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ftooling&data=02%7C01%7Cgdr%40microsoft.com%7C27707f2934414f42ce0008d68851478d%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636846280011356365&sdata=pirF5zPPJPA1wTgzkQ57pG5Snu2w1FH3O0PLsRLKDw8%3D&reserved=0>
Received on 2019-02-01 21:36:43