Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 6:29 AM, David Leimbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 8:23 PM, Anant Narayanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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!
Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 8:23 PM, Anant Narayanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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?
Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys
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
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Enrico Weigelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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
> * erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 für Modem und ISDN: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/smartsurfer
Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Enrico Weigelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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
* erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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
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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 10:34 AM, erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 2:34 AM, erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 10:34 AM, erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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
> > 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
Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 2:09 PM, erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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
Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys
> 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
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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>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 > >
Re: [9fans] those funny gnu guys
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
[9fans] those funny gnu guys
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
