"Bo Peng" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > and how will that change if you include pch.h in all the source files, | > excepti being overly intrusive? or having some files compiled iwth pch | > and some not...=? | | I do not think this is a matter of intrusiveness.
| By definition, PCH separates commonly used headers from all source | files, compile them separately to speed up compiling. It is then logic | to put pch.h into each source file and remove duplicate headers | accordingly. No, I do not agree. | Current lyx' approach is peculiar in that pch.h is not included, and | does not necessarily include commonly used headers. Our pch files are made from catting the dependency files together sorting and removing duplicates and singular includes. Unless you want a pch file for every source file some sourcefiles will get includes they strictly speaking did not need. | In pch mode, | --include=pch.h is passed. This will *not* work with msvc since msvc | scans source file for a stopping header file like stdafx.h. (Of | course, bugger off msvc) What is a 'stopping header file'? | > | 2. pch.cpp with | > | #include <pch.h> | > why? | | This is a way to make both gcc and msvc happy. I can handle the msvc | part by generating pch.cpp automatically. http://www.ddj.com/184404800 | is one of the proofs.. I don't quite understand what the pch.cpp file is needed for at all... | > and how will that change if you include pch.h in all the source files, | > excepti being overly intrusive? or having some files compiled iwth pch | > and some not...=? | | For msvc. Again, if pch.h is what it is supposed to be, include | <pch.h> is not intrusive. Sure it is. The only reason you include it is to accomodate the compiler. -- Lgb
