Re: Clone effectiveness
Bill Deegan <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.programming.tools.scons.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAEyG4CF+UpVDqyK+=4Ns8aVHkTh47XUDELet=n9Xna3vFJn1XA@mail.gmail.com> |
It does not. It uses the DefaultEnvironment object. On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 12:56 PM Hua Yanghao <[email protected]> wrote: > Is every call to "Object()" implicitly creates a clone of environment? > I seems like so just want to confirm. > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 9:20 PM Mats Wichmann <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 09/13/2018 12:52 PM, Damien Hocking wrote: > > > We do this too. Most dlls and sos have a cloned environment. > > > > As I said earlier, we clone lots (>90% of our sconscripts contain a > > Clone() call), but the actual build time dwarfs the "process the > > SConscripts" phase (*) so I don't worry much about it. We're not getting > > killed on memory; I can build easily enough in a 2gb Vagrant-provisioned > > (Linux) image. So while I'd like to *know* the numbers, it's mostly > > curiosity. > > > > Maybe we can resurrect some of the benchmarking/timing code that exists > > in the codebase now to get more info? > > > > * - recent build timings: > > Total build time: 360.533189 seconds (using scons -j4) > > Total SConscript file execution time: 14.785102 seconds > > > > 15 seconds is slow, but if I sped up the sconscript time by 50%, I'd > > still make no more than a 2% impact on the overall time. > > > > >> On Sep 13, 2018, at 12:27 PM, Pierre-Luc Boily < > [email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > >> Hello! > > >> > > >> Just read on the forum : > > >> > > >> /Here's the caveat. > > >> Don't make a gazillion Clone's they're not lightweight. > > >> If you make 100, it won't kill you, if you make 1000's you may start > seeing > > >> memory and speed impacted./ > > >> > > >> Our project branch contains 800 sconscript files. From those 800, > 300 are > > >> for windows compilation, 500 are for unix compilation. > > >> > > >> We systematically create a clone of the environment at the beginning > of > > >> *each *sconscript. So, if I understand well, it might not be the best > > >> approach. It would be better to do a Clone only when it is needed? > > >> Reducing the number of clone could potentially speed up the creating > of the > > >> tree? > > >> > > >> Thx > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Sent from: http://scons.1086193.n5.nabble.com/Users-f16930.html > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Scons-users mailing list > > >> [email protected] > > >> https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Scons-users mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Scons-users mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users > _______________________________________________ > Scons-users mailing list > [email protected] > https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users > _______________________________________________ Scons-users mailing list [email protected] https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users