| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
While reporting an origin target with action number within that
target describes an action uniquely in a way meaningful to the
user, it might not always be eay to unserstand which precise action
is currently running. For example, for a library with many source
files, we have a target generating a large number of actions and
the association of source file to action number requires detailled
knowledge of the build description. The name of the primary ouput
of that action, on the other hand immediately identifies the file
that is compiled. Therefore, report this as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
... while keeping our .clang-format file.
|
|
Main culprits:
- std::size_t, std::nullptr_t, and NULL require <cstddef>
- std::move and std::forward require <utility>
- unordered maps and sets require respective includes
- std::for_each and std::all_of require <algorithm>
|
|
...with regular instances that have controlled life-times.
This avoids race conditions in tracking and reporting the results
of analysis and build, as the serve endpoint can orchestrate
multiple builds at the same time asynchronously. As a bonus
side-effect this also ensures the correctness of the progress
reporting per orchestrated build.
|
|
|
|
Signed-off-by: Goetz Brasche <goetz.brasche@huawei.com>
|
|
|
|
For a user, an important information is to know which actions
are currently running and, more importantly, the target that
caused them. To do so, we need a bit of infrastructure.
- We have to keep track of begin and end of running actions,
as well as the order in which they were started. That has
to happen efficiently and in a thread-safe way.
- We have to compute and keep the origin map for actions,
even if we don't serialize the action graph.
|
