[M3devel] replace build system??

[Elmar Stellnberger]

>>
>>    Or, really, more simply, just accept a bunch of .mc/ms file pairs
>> and process them
>>    separately as usual, but within one m3cg invocation.
>>
>
> I like this idea, but we don't want to force serialization where we now
> do parallel
> runs of m3cg.
>
> OTOH, it has puzzled me why, when compiling m3cc or m3gdb, the C compile
> commands
> seem to scroll by slower than the unit compiles when running cm3,
> despite the fact
> that the latter include a main program invocation of m3cc.  Surely it's
> not merely
> smaller units?  And we are also running separately too.
>

Mika Nystroem, do you mean by 'setting M3_PARALLEL_BACK to 10 or 20' 
that the backend would generate code in parallel?
  - This would not be right what I want because actually obtaining 
deterministic build results is of high value for security reasons. It 
can be necessary to verify whether a given compiler toolkit / build 
environment must have been infected at the stage of build time with 
hindsight.
   I know deterministic builds are quite hard to realize even for some 
C/C++ applications; nonetheless I had never been thinking about Modula-3 
or CM3 in specific. At least it was a well known problem with Python 
that builds were non-deterministic due to parallel code generation.
   However that should not happen if just different source files are 
translated at the same time. Moreover that could also parallelize the 
activity of the front (and middle)-end.