From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,163994d4f34e92d0
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.66.82.2 with SMTP id e2mr3454101pay.40.1343789445898;
        Tue, 31 Jul 2012 19:50:45 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 g9ni9633010pbo.0!nntp.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nrc-news.nrc.ca!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: how to tell gnatmake to send executables to a different directory
 when compiling multi source?
Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2012 09:09:55 -0500
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <jv3g7h$ib4$1@speranza.aioe.org>
References: <jv2vu5$9tm$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 <p646bl8ekmhm.qkoxmbj6j4fq$.dlg@40tude.net> <jv376e$sla$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 <214bbd15-f7cb-4710-a6a7-64f37923bf4e@googlegroups.com>
 <jv3c8f$8oq$1@speranza.aioe.org> <87wr1moexq.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
Reply-To: nma@12000.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: 9ii5QNw33OfeoTzEH8w9ug.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
 rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 2012-07-29T09:09:55-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 7/29/2012 8:49 AM, Ludovic Brenta wrote:

>>
>> Here is very simple note on using recusive Make
>>
>> http://12000.org/my_notes/cheat_sheets/make_notes/index.htm
>

> And here is a very detailed note about why *not* to use recursive Make:
>
> http://miller.emu.id.au/pmiller/books/rmch/
>

I know about this, and read it. It is a 'popular' link
every time one says recursive make.

All what it boils to, is that recursive make is not
efficient. Ok. Big deal. I can wait 5 more seconds.
I have an 8 quad PC and lots of ram :)

I have been using recursive make for years, never seen a
problem. So I do not need a 'paper' written 15 years ago
to tell it is a bad idea.

I run make from the top of my tree, go make coffee, check
my mail, or take a short nap, and then it is done. It is
really never been an issue for me. so why fix what is not
broken :)

But this is for my personal use. May be for a large company
with millions of lines of code, then it is an issue. I do
not know. There are always things one can do to improve anything
they do I suppose. The problem is to pick the stuff that is
most important to improve on.

--Nasser