Reduce verbosity of "make testHeaders" - #2467
Conversation
| $(SED) "s%[@]HEADER[@]%${<}%" "$(top_srcdir)/test-suite/testHeader.cc.in" >"$$TargetFileName.cc" && \ | ||
| echo "$(CXXCOMPILE) -c -o" "$$TargetFileName" "$$TargetFileName.cc" && \ | ||
| if test "$(V)" != "0" ; then echo "$(CXXCOMPILE) -c -o" "$$TargetFileName" "$$TargetFileName.cc" ; fi && \ | ||
| if $(CXXCOMPILE) -c -o "$$TargetFileName" "$$TargetFileName.cc" ; \ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
After we settle on the best silencing method, please apply it to all similar echo command-that-will-run-next cases in .am files (at least). For example:
echo "$(INSTALL_DATA) $(builddir)/$$l/$$page ...I also recommend applying it to other progress-like echo cases. For example:
echo "Located $$l for install..."; ...There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd prefer to do that in a followup, but sure
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I do not insist on that, but, in my experience, in a PR dedicated to the corresponding improvement, it is usually best to address all eligible cases. That is actually one of the primary values of comprehensive dedicated PRs: Compared to a series of incomplete PRs spread over time, they reduce noise and half-working solution risks while avoiding technical debt creation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There is another problem to address then: echo is not portable. We should use $(ECHO) instead.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
and on that line, sed should be $(SED) (for a future PR)
kinkie
added
the
S-waiting-for-reviewer
rousskov
left a comment
rousskov
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Great progress, thank you.
I adjusted PR description to avoid the implication that only .cc files were removed.
| $(SED) "s%[@]HEADER[@]%${<}%" "$(top_srcdir)/test-suite/testHeader.cc.in" >"$$TargetFileName.cc" && \ | ||
| echo "$(CXXCOMPILE) -c -o" "$$TargetFileName" "$$TargetFileName.cc" && \ | ||
| if test "$(V)" != "0" ; then echo "$(CXXCOMPILE) -c -o" "$$TargetFileName" "$$TargetFileName.cc" ; fi && \ | ||
| if $(CXXCOMPILE) -c -o "$$TargetFileName" "$$TargetFileName.cc" ; \ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I do not insist on that, but, in my experience, in a PR dedicated to the corresponding improvement, it is usually best to address all eligible cases. That is actually one of the primary values of comprehensive dedicated PRs: Compared to a series of incomplete PRs spread over time, they reduce noise and half-working solution risks while avoiding technical debt creation.
Remove .cc files early from the testing, reducing verbosity. Additionally, only print the compile command if the V variable is non-zero, honoring the same convention used by autotools for all other targets. Error messages, warnings, and other output from the compiler will still be printed to the console.
Autotools provides $(AM_V_at) which expands to either '@' or empty, and $(AM_V_P) which expands to either : or false depending on $(V) levels. Instead of using GNU Make's $(filter), use awk for filtering out non-hdrtest targets
4ab941e to
9b9788b
Compare
2 participants
In
testHeaderstarget, run recursive "make" only for.hdrtestfiles.Skipping numerous
.cc,.cci,.in, etc. target dependencies removesassociated "Nothing to be done for..." build noise.
Additionally, only print the compile command if the V variable
is non-zero, honoring the same convention used by autotools
for all other targets.
Error messages, warnings, and other output from the compiler
will still be printed to the console.