Compling files with local options
Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2011 11:47 am
Hi,
I have some units with local options that override the default project options. (Ex: for some units I don't need debug information). I select my unit in the Project manager --> Edit local options and disable debug information for the compiler.
When I try to compile my project using multiple threads, ALL the files with local options are compiles one by one (so only ONE thread is used). Also, the compile status windows says that the total number of files to compile is 1. After the first file with local options is compiled, it jumps to a total number of files: 2 and so on, until all the units with local options are compiled. When these are compiled, TC starts compiling the units that do not have local options. These units are correctly compiled (total number of files is correct and multiple threads are used).
I'm using RAD Studio 2010.
Could you please check why the units with local options are not compiled in multiple threads? And why the total number of files is incorrect?
Thanks, Steven
I have some units with local options that override the default project options. (Ex: for some units I don't need debug information). I select my unit in the Project manager --> Edit local options and disable debug information for the compiler.
When I try to compile my project using multiple threads, ALL the files with local options are compiles one by one (so only ONE thread is used). Also, the compile status windows says that the total number of files to compile is 1. After the first file with local options is compiled, it jumps to a total number of files: 2 and so on, until all the units with local options are compiled. When these are compiled, TC starts compiling the units that do not have local options. These units are correctly compiled (total number of files is correct and multiple threads are used).
I'm using RAD Studio 2010.
Could you please check why the units with local options are not compiled in multiple threads? And why the total number of files is incorrect?
Thanks, Steven