Emacs and LLDB

Posted Feb 15, 2015 23:34 UTC (Sun) by PaXTeam (guest, #24616)
In reply to: Emacs and LLDB by dlang
Parent article: Emacs and LLDB

icc is good on some code but not so good on other kinds of code, but you'd already know that if you had actually done that compiler selection you claim ;). case in point: http://blog.pgaddict.com/posts/postgresql-performance-wit... . you'll have to come back with benchmarks that show the dominance of icc on system-wide code in general (the kind where CFI/SSP would be applied). also remember rsidd's original claim:

> For most applications, runtime speed within 10% or 20% really doesn't matter.

what you said contradicts him, welcome to the club ;).

Emacs and LLDB

Posted Feb 16, 2015 3:43 UTC (Mon) by rsidd (subscriber, #2582) [Link]

Not sure how what dlang said contradicts me. He said gcc was generally slower but that often didn't deter companies. Nearly all computing is io-bound, not cpu-bound. Say compiler A is 20% slower than compiler B. A program spends 80% of time waiting for input (most often it's 99%, think word processors etc, but let's say 80%). Then in practice the program will run 4% slower with compiler A. If compiler A makes life significantly easier for the programmer, the choice is pretty obvious.