Can PackageCompiler.jl compile just parts of packages?

I’m developing a package, and it takes quite a while to compile (~30s), which is long enough to be annoying when trying to test/bugfix/retest. PackageCompiler.jl is awesome and can get rid of the compilation overhead (by creating a .so), so a test run takes <1s instead of ~30s, but that’s not helpful if I need to edit the code and re-run. However, at any one time I’ll only be working on part of the code - it would be wonderful if the other parts could be compiled into a .so, while leaving the parts that I’m working on to be recompiled on each run. Is this possible? To be concrete, I’d like to be able to pass a list of submodules or functions from my package to the create_sysimage function, and have only those be added.

Are you using Revise.jl already?

2 Likes

I’m not - I’ve seen the name a couple of times but not looked into that package yet.

Thanks! I’ll put Revise.jl on my reading list.

1 Like

If you’re developing a package you should definitely try out Revise the next time you open a Julia REPL.

It is so crucial that it is in my autostart and the first one I load in Pluto/Jupyter.

Revise.jl does look very nice. On a very quick test though, it doesn’t seem to work with PackageCompiler.jl - in the sense that if I precompile my package with PackageCompiler.create_sysimage() (even passing a script to the precompile_execution_file argument that has using Revise before using my_package) then even using the REPL and calling using Revise before using my_package, and editing my_package after doing both of those, the functions called from my_package are the ones that were compiled into the .so, not the edited ones. It’s not a big issue, as I guess the best practice is to just keep the REPL open and develop using Revise.jl, so PackageCompiler.jl is not needed during development - it would be nice to combine the benefits though!

One option is to use PackageCompiler for all your dependencies but not the code you’re actively working on, and then use Revise for the code you are developing.

2 Likes

Yeah, that seems like it might be the best option. I’m going to try out that workflow and see how it goes!

1 Like