[9fans] those funny gnu guys

[9fans] those funny gnu guys

[erik quanstrom]

this is just stupifying:

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1029797&cid=25761431

Due to a strange quirk in the way compilers are designed, it's (MUCH) faster to build a dozen files that include every file in your project than to build thousands of files.

Once build times are down to 5 - 15 minutes you don't need distributed compiling. The link step is typically the most expensive anyway, so distributed compiling doesn't get you much.

sorry for the noise.

- erik

Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys

[ron minnich]

new word, inspired by this:

stupedifying

in the sense of stupid, stupefying, and edifying in all one blow.

I googled it and now feel much less creative.

ron

Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys

[David Leimbach]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 708 bytes --]

reading slashdot is almost never worth the bandwidth or the time of your
life spent looking at it.

On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 10:34 AM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>wrote:

> this is just stupifying:
>
> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1029797&cid=25761431
>
> Due to a strange quirk in the way compilers are designed, it's (MUCH)
> faster to build a dozen files that include every file in your project than
> to build thousands of files.
>
> Once build times are down to 5 - 15 minutes you don't need distributed
> compiling. The link step is typically the most expensive anyway, so
> distributed compiling doesn't get you much.
>
> sorry for the noise.
>
> - erik
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1095 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys

[erik quanstrom]

> reading slashdot is almost never worth the bandwidth or the time of your
> life spent looking at it.

if you are looking for technical information, you're
correct.  it's not useful.

if however, you're interested in what people think,
slashdot is a good barometer.

- erik

Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys

[David Leimbach]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 572 bytes --]

On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 2:09 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@coraid.com> wrote:

> > reading slashdot is almost never worth the bandwidth or the time of your
> > life spent looking at it.
>
> if you are looking for technical information, you're
> correct.  it's not useful.
>
> if however, you're interested in what people think,
> slashdot is a good barometer.
>
> - erik
>
> My mileage on that has varied as well :-).  Most people I know couldn't
give a rats ass about what slashdotters think, and no one I work for or with
even looks at that site.

Dave

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 925 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys

[John Barham]

On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 10:34 AM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
> this is just stupifying:
>
> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1029797&cid=25761431

I see that this comment has been voted +4 "informative".

Truly a shining example of the web 2.0 wisdom of crowds at work!

  John

Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys

[Uriel]

You don't need the crowds for this kind of  'wisdom', google has been
one of the main pushers for distributed compilation lately... with ken
on board, that is a rather sad thing to waste resources on.

uriel

On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 7:29 AM, John Barham <jbarham@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 10:34 AM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
>> this is just stupifying:
>>
>> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1029797&cid=25761431
>
> I see that this comment has been voted +4 "informative".
>
> Truly a shining example of the web 2.0 wisdom of crowds at work!
>
>  John
>
>

Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys

[Rogelio Serrano]

On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 2:34 AM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
> this is just stupifying:
>
> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1029797&cid=25761431
>
> Due to a strange quirk in the way compilers are designed, it's (MUCH) faster to build a dozen files that include every file in your project than to build thousands of files.
>
> Once build times are down to 5 - 15 minutes you don't need distributed compiling. The link step is typically the most expensive anyway, so distributed compiling doesn't get you much.
>
> sorry for the noise.
>
> - erik
>
>

I just dont get it. How does distributed linking not help?

--
Lay low and nourish in obscurity

Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys

[Enrico Weigelt]

* erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:

Hi,

> this is just stupifying:
>
> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1029797&cid=25761431

gcc is a mess, right. But is there an usable alternative ?


cu
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys

[Rogelio Serrano]

On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:
> * erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>> this is just stupifying:
>>
>> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1029797&cid=25761431
>
> gcc is a mess, right. But is there an usable alternative ?
>
>
> cu

there is llvm

im more inclined towards hacking on ACK though

> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
>        http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
>  Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
>        http://patches.metux.de/
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>



--
Lay low and nourish in obscurity

Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys

[thagonzo]

> * erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > this is just stupifying:
> >
> > http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1029797&cid=25761431
>
> gcc is a mess, right. But is there an usable alternative ?

pcc, http://pcc.ludd.ltu.se/



>
>
> cu

--
Der GMX SmartSurfer hilft bis zu 70% Ihrer Onlinekosten zu sparen!
Ideal f�r Modem und ISDN: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/smartsurfer

Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys

[sqweek]

On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:
> * erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>> this is just stupifying:
>>
>> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1029797&cid=25761431
>
> gcc is a mess, right. But is there an usable alternative ?

 8c! http://gsoc.cat-v.org/hg/kenc
 (Anant, did you have another port as part of Glendix, or am I getting
mixed up?)
-sqweek

Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys

[Anant Narayanan]

> 8c! http://gsoc.cat-v.org/hg/kenc
> (Anant, did you have another port as part of Glendix, or am I getting
> mixed up?)

Yes, 8c & 8l now work on Glendix.

Regards,
Anant

Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys

[David Leimbach]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 344 bytes --]

On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 8:23 PM, Anant Narayanan <anant@kix.in> wrote:

> 8c! http://gsoc.cat-v.org/hg/kenc
>> (Anant, did you have another port as part of Glendix, or am I getting
>> mixed up?)
>>
>
> Yes, 8c & 8l now work on Glendix.
>
> Regards,
> Anant
>
Did you port these to ELF or did you make a loader for Plan 9 binaries?

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 815 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys

[David Leimbach]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 533 bytes --]

On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 6:29 AM, David Leimbach <leimy2k@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 8:23 PM, Anant Narayanan <anant@kix.in> wrote:
>
>>  8c! http://gsoc.cat-v.org/hg/kenc
>>> (Anant, did you have another port as part of Glendix, or am I getting
>>> mixed up?)
>>>
>>
>> Yes, 8c & 8l now work on Glendix.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Anant
>>
> Did you port these to ELF or did you make a loader for Plan 9 binaries?
>
>
> Just answered this question for myself by reading the paper at Glendix.
 Nice!

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1268 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys

[erik quanstrom]

> > My mileage on that has varied as well :-).  Most people I know couldn't
> give a rats ass about what slashdotters think, and no one I work for or with
> even looks at that site.

it must be nice to run in such elite circles.  perhaps
one day when i am not employed buidling stuff people
are willing to pay for, i shall be afforded such luxury.

even if only to beg to differ.

- erik