[lldb-dev] MSBuild vs. Ninja build-timings on Windows
zturner at google.com
Fri Jan 2 15:32:16 PST 2015
+Nico Weber <thakis at google.com>
Nico might be able to give you some more insight on exactly why Ninja is
faster than MSBuild. My (limited) understanding is that it has better
dependency tracking, but I'm not sure where the "betterness" comes from.
I'm not sure how MSBuild compares to GNU Make. I'm not sure if anyone
actually uses Make to build LLDB on Windows or if it even works. I know at
some point, even if way off into the future, it would be nice to get rid of
the configure/make build entirely. The only reason it's still around is
because it supports a few features not supported by the CMake build. If /
when those issues get resolved, I think the LLVM side will try to remove
it, and then we should follow suit.
On Fri Jan 02 2015 at 3:23:05 PM René J.V. <rjvbertin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday January 02 2015 19:53:00 Zachary Turner wrote:
> > Here are build timings on my local machine comparing Ninja against
> > on Windows.
> That's for building lldb I presume? How does MSBuild compare to (GNU) make?
> > Ninja MSBuild
> > Clean Build 0:11:4.16 0:14:4.33
> That's a larger difference than I would have expected - it seems the time
> spent compiling is short compared to the time that could be spent tracking
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the lldb-dev