It actually decreases readability of the .do files - by not making it
explicit when you're going into a subdir.
Plus it adds ambiguity: what if there's a dirname.do *and* a dirname/all?
We could resolve the ambiguity if we wanted, but that adds more code, while
taking out this special case makes *less* code and improves readability.
I think it's the right way to go.
Normally, creating the target $1 yourself is bad; create $3 instead. But if
$1 is a directory, we'll allow it. That way 'redo subdir' can call
subdir.do, and subdir.do can both create the directory *and* run a bunch of
sub-.do files on it.
...because we deliberately stamp non-generated files as well, and that
doesn't need to imply that we rebuilt them just now. In fact, we know for a
fact that we *didn't* rebuild them just now, but we still need to record the
timestamp for later.
.do files should never modify $1, and should write to *either* $3 or stdout,
but not both. If they write to both, it's probably because they forgot to
redirect stdout to stderr, a very easy mistake to make but a hard one to
detect.
Now redo detects it for you and prints an informative message.
If 'redo clean' deletes the lockfile after trylock() succeeds but before
unlock(), then unlock() won't be able to open the pipe in order to release
readers, and any waiters might end up waiting forever.
We can't open the fifo for write until there's at least one reader, so let's
open a reader *just* to let us open a writer. Then we'll leave them open
until the later unlock(), which can just close them both.
Otherwise it could be inherited by other jwack jobs started from the same
parent process, resulting in some very-hard-to-debug race conditions, let me
tell you.
This avoids a second fork altogether, which apparently doesn't matter all
that much (5.3s -> 5.15s). However, simply not importing the subprocess
module reduces us further to 4.6s.
And 'ps axf' now looks prettier because we have fewer stupid intermediate
processes.
instead of inside the fork.
Still doesn't seem to affect runtime. Good.
One nice side effect is jwack.py no longer needs to know anything about our
locks.
We can also avoid forking altogether if should_build() returns false. This
doesn't seem to result in any noticeable speedup, but it's cleaner at least.
Previously, the default was to *always* keep going, which is actually not
usually what you want. Now we actually exit correctly after an error. Of
course you still might have multiple errors before existing if you were
building in parallel.
Get rid of the "locked..." and "...unlocked!" messages by default, since
they're not usually interesting. But add a new option to bring them back in
case we end up with trouble debugging the locking stuff. (I don't really
100% trust it yet, although I haven't had a problem for a while now.)
