Xref: news-dnh.mv.net comp.os.msdos.djgpp:2599 Path: news-dnh.mv.net!mv!news.sprintlink.net!news.uoregon.edu!waikato!midland.co.nz!chrismac From: chrismac AT midland DOT co DOT nz (Chris McFarlane) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: Many small files versus big clusters Date: Fri, 13 Oct 95 14:08:28 GMT Organization: . Lines: 29 References: Nntp-Posting-Host: chrismac.midland.co.nz To: djgpp AT sun DOT soe DOT clarkson DOT edu Dj-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp In article , "A.Appleyard" wrote: > A.Appleyard wrote:- >> If (say) all the files LIBSRC\C\IO\*.C are chained into one big file >> LIBSRC\C\IO.C, and after each function (plus its associated outermost-level >> declarations) you insert a new preprocessor command `#libunit' ... > > Thomas Eifert replied:- >> just enough to make all that stuff incompatible to the rest of the world - >> is it that you desire ??? > > Someone has to be first with these new ideas, and it may as well be djgpp > as anyone else. A novel and interesting idea, worthy of further consideration. How do you view handling the advantages of modular development ? If multiple files are concatenated, then surely the editor must load everything to edit one subfile, slowing down the performance. Sharing development amongst a number of contributors gets difficult to coordinate; requiring merging under a concatenated module scheme. When recompiling, perhaps the entire file will need recompilation, rather than just a subfile as at present; exit the make system advantages. For completed code, undergoing minimal changes, perhaps these aspects aren't a significant disadvantage ? How do you view these needs ? Chris