From: Dale Johannesen <dalej@apple.com>
To: Robert Dewar <dewar@adacore.com>
Cc: Ian Lance Taylor <ian@airs.com>,
Dale Johannesen <dalej@apple.com>,
Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@gcc.gnu.org>,
gcc mailing list <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Link-time optimzation
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 02:33:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6d98145a15b3bb76c3c1fdedd2dd66fc@apple.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <437D0DC7.7040509@adacore.com>
On Nov 17, 2005, at 3:09 PM, Robert Dewar wrote:
> Richard Earnshaw wrote:
>
>>> We spend a lot of time printing out the results of compilation as
>>> assembly language, only to have to parse it all again in the
>>> assembler.
>>>
> I never like arguments which have loaded words like "lot" without
> quantification. Just how long *is* spent in this step, is it really
> significant?
When I arrived at Apple around 5 years ago, I was told of some recent
measurements that showed the assembler took around 5% of the time.
Don't know if that's still accurate. Of course the speed of the
assembler
is also relevant, and our stubs and lazy pointers probably mean Apple's
.s files are bigger than other people's.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-11-18 2:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-11-16 22:26 Mark Mitchell
2005-11-16 22:41 ` Andrew Pinski
2005-11-16 22:58 ` Andrew Pinski
2005-11-17 0:02 ` Andrew Pinski
2005-11-17 0:25 ` Andrew Pinski
2005-11-17 0:52 ` Tom Tromey
2005-11-17 0:26 ` Giovanni Bajo
2005-11-17 0:32 ` Daniel Berlin
2005-11-17 9:04 ` Giovanni Bajo
2005-11-17 16:25 ` Kenneth Zadeck
2005-11-17 1:20 ` Richard Henderson
2005-11-17 1:28 ` Mark Mitchell
2005-11-17 1:31 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-11-17 3:35 ` Jeffrey A Law
2005-11-17 14:09 ` Daniel Berlin
2005-11-17 14:48 ` mathieu lacage
2005-11-17 11:41 ` Richard Earnshaw
2005-11-17 21:40 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2005-11-17 23:10 ` Robert Dewar
2005-11-17 23:42 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2005-11-18 2:13 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-11-18 9:29 ` Bernd Schmidt
2005-11-18 11:19 ` Robert Dewar
2005-11-18 11:29 ` Richard Earnshaw
2005-11-18 11:40 ` Directly generating binary code [Was Re: Link-time optimzation] Andrew Haley
2005-11-18 12:04 ` Laurent GUERBY
2005-11-18 17:41 ` Jim Blandy
2005-11-18 18:35 ` Link-time optimzation Mike Stump
2005-11-18 2:33 ` Dale Johannesen [this message]
2005-11-18 3:11 ` Geert Bosch
2005-11-18 18:43 ` Mike Stump
2005-11-18 18:30 ` Mike Stump
2005-11-17 15:54 ` Kenneth Zadeck
2005-11-17 16:41 ` Jan Hubicka
2005-11-18 16:31 ` Michael Matz
2005-11-18 17:04 ` Steven Bosscher
2005-11-18 17:29 ` Michael Matz
2005-11-18 17:24 ` Nathan Sidwell
2005-11-17 1:43 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2005-11-17 1:53 ` Andrew Pinski
2005-11-17 2:39 ` Kean Johnston
2005-11-17 5:53 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2005-11-17 13:08 ` Ulrich Weigand
2005-11-17 21:42 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2005-11-17 16:17 ` Kenneth Zadeck
2005-11-17 0:52 Chris Lattner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=6d98145a15b3bb76c3c1fdedd2dd66fc@apple.com \
--to=dalej@apple.com \
--cc=dewar@adacore.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=ian@airs.com \
--cc=rearnsha@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).