You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
After we change the implementation of a() from return 43; to return 44;, we can avoid recompiling use.cc to use.o since the interface doesn't change.
This is pretty helpful to improve the user's experience by avoiding unnecessary recompilations as much as possible.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
After we change the implementation of a() from return 43; to return 44;, we can avoid recompiling use.cc to use.o since the interface doesn't change.
This is pretty helpful to improve the user's experience by avoiding unnecessary recompilations as much as possible.
Now although B will almost always get changed if module A changes, but the BMI of B won't change if it doesn't affect the interface. Then we can avoid the recompilation of C.
Note that the original idea that avoid changing the BMI of A is considered not good now since we think the source location is significant.
Then I'd like to close the issue since we may not record and read a BMI hash but generate the same BMI directly.
The motivating example comes from #70569.
For example,
After we change the implementation of
a()
fromreturn 43;
toreturn 44;
, we can avoid recompiling use.cc to use.o since the interface doesn't change.This is pretty helpful to improve the user's experience by avoiding unnecessary recompilations as much as possible.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: