Re: [Chicken-users] compilation question

[Felix Winkelmann]

Peter Keller wrote:
> This is depressing. It basically means that you can't do separate compilation
> when using my test code. Since I want this code highly portable, I can't
> make small additions into the chicken libraries.
>
> Basically, people are going to have to do:
>
> file top.scm:
> (include "test-infrastructure.scm") ;; 3000 lines of code
> (include "test0.scm") ;; 400 lines of code
> (include "test1.scm") ;; 900 lines of code
> (include "test2.scm") ;; 1400 lines of code
> (include "test3.scm") ;; 2800 lines of code
> (include "test4.scm") ;; 4000 lines of code
> (include "run-tests.scm") ;; 10 lines of code
> (run-tests)
>
> And _wait_ while chicken and gcc try to compile a 12,510(before macro
> expansion!) line scheme file.  It already takes more than two minutes
> to compile my GNU MP interface and that is only 2600 lines of code.
>
> Am I going to have to split the testing infrastructure file into two
> files, one pure macros and functions, and the other toplevel defines? You
> can include one is all of your test code, but the other one only once?

Hm. Now if I understand you correctly you need unique Id's
accross multiple compilation units, right?
This is a problem that has nothing to do with Chicken per
se - you want to share information across multiple compiles.
You either have to link a common library, or find a different
solution.
You could write the state of the counter into a file.
Or generate more complex IDs by combining (say) a (large) random
number with the name of the test-suite (which could be communicated
via the test-package macro, for example).


cheers,
felix