[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Looking into LLVM



On 10/26/2009 10:51 AM, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-10-26 at 20:13 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> On 10/26/2009 08:15 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2009-10-26 at 19:07 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>>>> On 10/26/2009 07:03 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 2009-10-25 at 21:05 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>>>> I meant performance, primarily in terms of speed of compilation. Not the
>>>> code itself.
>>>
>>> Suppose it's faster.  Say even by a factor of 100.  So what?  What
>>> problem would that solve?
>>
>> The problem of slow compilation? :-)
> 
> Which affects who?  koji certainly seems to be keeping up with the load.
> 
> What I'm trying to pry out of you is what you'd be hoping to accomplish
> by using it.  The answer so far seems to be "I'd spend less time
> building things, at the cost of some unknown amount of time invested in
> fixing everything to build again".  That doesn't sound like progress.

Well, that plus your already voiced complaint about its dwarf generation,
which is to say that any fairly immediate adoption would also make normal
development and debugging more painful.

-- 
        Peter

Gravity is a habit that is hard to shake off.
		-- Pratchett


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]