Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
An unexpected perf feature
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 16, 2013
A look at the PyPy 2.0 release
PostgreSQL 9.3 beta: Federated databases and more
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 9, 2013
Build time of QT-based software is not significantly greater than GTK-based software.
Day: GNOME OS
Posted Aug 8, 2012 23:29 UTC (Wed) by Company (guest, #57006)
C++ compilers are orders of magnitude slower and more memory-intensive than C compilers.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MT... builds Linux in less than 1 minute on a single core. A Firefox (which is less code size) build according to Firefox's build farm at https://tbpl.mozilla.org/ takes from slightly less than an hour to 2 hours.
Posted Aug 9, 2012 0:05 UTC (Thu) by hummassa (subscriber, #307)
Posted Aug 9, 2012 2:37 UTC (Thu) by Company (guest, #57006)
Posted Aug 9, 2012 2:46 UTC (Thu) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389)
Better would be to compare Koji's build times for the packages (though you'll need to factor out the root.log time due to different dependencies). Bonus points for getting builds from the same host at low load.
Posted Aug 9, 2012 3:04 UTC (Thu) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389)
Basically, your comparison is: "more" C is compiled by a top-of-the-line CPU in one minute than some random build farm hardware can test "less" C++ code. Never mind that the build farm builds also start by doing lots of PyPI installs (mostly cached) whereas the kernel build goes straight to building stuff.
Posted Aug 9, 2012 21:05 UTC (Thu) by ibukanov (subscriber, #3942)
Posted Aug 9, 2012 23:48 UTC (Thu) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389)
> As for build times, yes, it's higher, but I don't really notice that much of a practical difference and what difference there is is well worth the extra safety the code has.
Unfortunately, a fair comparison can't be made without ensuring at least feature parity between the C and C++. You also have to compare bug counts and code ease-of-use (for users of the code/APIs, developers, and maintainers) and in this, C++ is a big win IMO.
The C++ SpiderMonkey has more features today than it used to have (I expect) and you have to weigh how long it took to code those features versus how long it would have taken with the C codebase to get the same features against the increased build times.
As for using a netbook, I don't know what my limits for patience would be anymore. After using my i7 and Xeon machines at work, even my Core 2 Duo was getting me impatient with builds. I don't do much beyond script-level stuff (usually Haskell, shell, or Python) or minor web development on the netbook anymore mainly due to the tiny screen (my terminals at work are 319 wide and 88 tall and netbooks just don't fit 3 80-wide Vim windows plus NERDTree on them at readable font sizes).
Posted Aug 10, 2012 10:38 UTC (Fri) by jwakely (subscriber, #60262)
Posted Aug 10, 2012 20:05 UTC (Fri) by ibukanov (subscriber, #3942)
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds