Re: Digger 1.0
On 01/10/2014 04:51, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: On Tuesday, 30 September 2014 at 12:19:05 UTC, Nick Treleaven wrote: On 23/09/2014 11:20, Nick Treleaven wrote: Linking phobos.lib is the first time I've got OOM, I use Firefox heavily. phobos.lib is only 10 MB, which is why I thought it odd that linking uses well over 1 GB. I'm now building Phobos 'myself' with win32.mak rather than with Digger, and it seems to use under 1 GB (~750 KB). YMMV. Here I meant 750 MB :-/ Also I think I was wrong to say just 'linking', it seems to be compiling Phobos as well, so it's understandable why it uses that amount of memory. I don't think Digger should use much more memory than when building things manually. Can you check what's using up memory when using Digger? With both Digger 1.0 and just win32.mak, building latest phobos.lib took about 792 MB. Sorry for the noise.
Re: Digger 1.0
On Wednesday, 1 October 2014 at 15:17:09 UTC, Nick Treleaven wrote: OK, I'll try it again. I had been using an old-ish Git checkout of Digger, I've updated to 1.0, but I get this error: $ rdmd --build-only digger digger.d(6): Error: module wininet is in file 'ae\sys\net\wininet.d' which cannot be read import path[0] = . import path[1] = c:\D\dmd2\windows\bin\..\..\src\phobos import path[2] = c:\D\dmd2\windows\bin\..\..\src\druntime\import Failed: ["dmd", "-v", "-o-", "digger.d", "-I."] There is no folder 'net' under ae/sys. After updating a Git repository with submodules, you need to run "git submodule update" to update the submodules too (ae in this case).
Re: Digger 1.0
On Tuesday, 30 September 2014 at 09:35:20 UTC, Marco Leise wrote: So why would Apple be able to get away with 1GB on its just released iPhone 6? Maybe 1048576 kilobytes is enough for everyone? ARC is more memory efficient than mark & sweep GC like Javascript uses. Though a lot of it is just that iOS developers are simply very careful about memory use. Writing a performant game in iOS is really quite hard because of the memory constraints.
Re: Digger 1.0
On 01/10/2014 04:51, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: On Tuesday, 30 September 2014 at 12:19:05 UTC, Nick Treleaven wrote: On 23/09/2014 11:20, Nick Treleaven wrote: Linking phobos.lib is the first time I've got OOM, I use Firefox heavily. phobos.lib is only 10 MB, which is why I thought it odd that linking uses well over 1 GB. I'm now building Phobos 'myself' with win32.mak rather than with Digger, and it seems to use under 1 GB (~750 KB). YMMV. Also I think I was wrong to say just 'linking', it seems to be compiling Phobos as well, so it's understandable why it uses that amount of memory. I don't think Digger should use much more memory than when building things manually. Can you check what's using up memory when using Digger? OK, I'll try it again. I had been using an old-ish Git checkout of Digger, I've updated to 1.0, but I get this error: $ rdmd --build-only digger digger.d(6): Error: module wininet is in file 'ae\sys\net\wininet.d' which cannot be read import path[0] = . import path[1] = c:\D\dmd2\windows\bin\..\..\src\phobos import path[2] = c:\D\dmd2\windows\bin\..\..\src\druntime\import Failed: ["dmd", "-v", "-o-", "digger.d", "-I."] There is no folder 'net' under ae/sys.
Re: Digger 1.0
On Tuesday, 30 September 2014 at 12:19:05 UTC, Nick Treleaven wrote: On 23/09/2014 11:20, Nick Treleaven wrote: Linking phobos.lib is the first time I've got OOM, I use Firefox heavily. phobos.lib is only 10 MB, which is why I thought it odd that linking uses well over 1 GB. I'm now building Phobos 'myself' with win32.mak rather than with Digger, and it seems to use under 1 GB (~750 KB). YMMV. Also I think I was wrong to say just 'linking', it seems to be compiling Phobos as well, so it's understandable why it uses that amount of memory. I don't think Digger should use much more memory than when building things manually. Can you check what's using up memory when using Digger?
Re: Digger 1.0
On 23/09/2014 11:20, Nick Treleaven wrote: Linking phobos.lib is the first time I've got OOM, I use Firefox heavily. phobos.lib is only 10 MB, which is why I thought it odd that linking uses well over 1 GB. I'm now building Phobos 'myself' with win32.mak rather than with Digger, and it seems to use under 1 GB (~750 KB). YMMV. Also I think I was wrong to say just 'linking', it seems to be compiling Phobos as well, so it's understandable why it uses that amount of memory.
Re: Digger 1.0
Am Mon, 22 Sep 2014 18:59:12 + schrieb "Vladimir Panteleev" : > On Monday, 22 September 2014 at 17:28:50 UTC, ketmar via > Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > > On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 15:24:55 +0200 > > simendsjo via Digitalmars-d-announce > > wrote: > > > >> My guess is the average for developers is ~8GB. 2GB RAM is > >> really not > >> enough for pretty much anything these days - the browser alone > >> easily > >> chews 3-4GB on moderate use. I recommend you just upgrade your > >> computer (or compile on a better iron). > > are your primary language is java? i'm asking just out of > > curiousity. > > That was uncalled for. > > Firefox requires 4GB of memory to build. > Chromium requires 8GB of memory to build. > Android requires 16GB of memory to build. I've been compiling Firefox and Chromium with 4GB of RAM + 4GB of swap on Linux 64-bit in the past. I don't know if I had to close any applications for that. > I think 4GB for a modern programming language's implementation is > not an unreasonable requirement, even if it could be brought down > in the future. Especially considering that you can't even buy a > new laptop today with less than 4GB of RAM, and 3GB is becoming > the norm for smartphones. So why would Apple be able to get away with 1GB on its just released iPhone 6? Maybe 1048576 kilobytes is enough for everyone? -- Marco
Re: [OT] Memory usage and Web (WAS: Re: Digger 1.0)
On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 18:29:17 +0200 simendsjo via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > But if your parents want Facebook and Instagram, you better give them > a pretty beefy computer. i'll give 'em opera 12. yes, it's dead, but it's the only browser that can work month by month without restarting (no, i'm not kidding!) and feel itself good in ~300-400 MB of RAM. no FOSS bloatware browser can compete (alas). signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[OT] Memory usage and Web (WAS: Re: Digger 1.0)
On 09/23/2014 04:48 PM, Joakim wrote: > On Monday, 22 September 2014 at 13:23:33 UTC, simendsjo wrote: >> My guess is the average for developers is ~8GB. 2GB RAM is really not >> enough for pretty much anything these days - the browser alone easily >> chews 3-4GB on moderate use. > > You have to admit that this is ridiculous. I updated to the 64-bit > Chrome on Windows when it came out and it is a huge memory hog. Web > browsers have grown out of control. It's well beyond rediculous. After I log into my graphical environment with everything started, ~200MB is used. Launch a browser, and suddenly ~3800MB is used. If it wasn't for everyone hailing the inner platform effect (usually seen as a bad thing) as the best thing since sliced bread, many laptops would probably not ship with 4GB standard. But if your parents want Facebook and Instagram, you better give them a pretty beefy computer. Oh... And the CPU requirements is pretty steep too - even my Lenovo T520 (Core i7) is really slow at browsing the web! Oh.. And did I forget? You have to run a dynamic programming language that pushes most mistakes easily caught at compile-time to runtime errors. I obviously don't think The Web™ has made the right choices. The amount of Javascript hype I see makes me quite ill. An OS? Really? In Javascript? Seriously?
Re: Digger 1.0
On Saturday, 20 September 2014 at 20:07:46 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: Yet another release ruined by a DMD -inline wrong-code bug :( It seems like use of -inline is not recommended then?
Re: Digger 1.0
On Monday, 22 September 2014 at 13:23:33 UTC, simendsjo wrote: My guess is the average for developers is ~8GB. 2GB RAM is really not enough for pretty much anything these days - the browser alone easily chews 3-4GB on moderate use. You have to admit that this is ridiculous. I updated to the 64-bit Chrome on Windows when it came out and it is a huge memory hog. Web browsers have grown out of control. On Monday, 22 September 2014 at 18:59:13 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: Firefox requires 4GB of memory to build. Chromium requires 8GB of memory to build. This is not a requirement for Chromium, merely a recommendation for faster builds. I regularly built Chromium for FreeBSD with 2 GBs of RAM up till a couple years ago. Perhaps it has gotten much more bloated since or maybe just on Windows, but phobos shouldn't be in the same class. If you want to work on big projects, you WILL need a decent computer. I think 4GB for a modern programming language's implementation is not an unreasonable requirement, even if it could be brought down in the future. Especially considering that you can't even buy a new laptop today with less than 4GB of RAM, and 3GB is becoming the norm for smartphones. I'd say it's unreasonable from a technical standpoint, maybe not that much from an affordability standpoint, which is what you're pointing out. My guess is the real problem is optlink on Windows, in which case I recommend that Nick try out the new 32-bit MSVC toolchain support, if he can't use the existing 64-bit Windows MSVC integration. I regularly build git HEAD of dmd/druntime/phobos in a linux VM with 512 MB of RAM and about the same amount of swap and have never had a problem. It's only when compiling the unit tests that I have to start increasing the allocated RAM.
Re: Digger 1.0
On 22/09/2014 19:59, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: Firefox requires 4GB of memory to build. Chromium requires 8GB of memory to build. Android requires 16GB of memory to build. Thanks for the info, I didn't realize. If you want to work on big projects, you WILL need a decent computer. I think 4GB for a modern programming language's implementation is not an unreasonable requirement, even if it could be brought down in the future. Especially considering that you can't even buy a new laptop today with less than 4GB of RAM, and 3GB is becoming the norm for smartphones. OK. Perhaps I can upgrade my RAM (I can't afford a new computer). Linking phobos.lib is the first time I've got OOM, I use Firefox heavily. phobos.lib is only 10 MB, which is why I thought it odd that linking uses well over 1 GB.
Re: Digger 1.0
On Monday, 22 September 2014 at 17:28:50 UTC, ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 15:24:55 +0200 simendsjo via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: My guess is the average for developers is ~8GB. 2GB RAM is really not enough for pretty much anything these days - the browser alone easily chews 3-4GB on moderate use. I recommend you just upgrade your computer (or compile on a better iron). are your primary language is java? i'm asking just out of curiousity. That was uncalled for. Firefox requires 4GB of memory to build. Chromium requires 8GB of memory to build. Android requires 16GB of memory to build. If you want to work on big projects, you WILL need a decent computer. I think 4GB for a modern programming language's implementation is not an unreasonable requirement, even if it could be brought down in the future. Especially considering that you can't even buy a new laptop today with less than 4GB of RAM, and 3GB is becoming the norm for smartphones.
Re: Digger 1.0
On 09/22/2014 07:28 PM, ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 15:24:55 +0200 > simendsjo via Digitalmars-d-announce > wrote: > >> My guess is the average for developers is ~8GB. 2GB RAM is really not >> enough for pretty much anything these days - the browser alone easily >> chews 3-4GB on moderate use. I recommend you just upgrade your >> computer (or compile on a better iron). > are your primary language is java? i'm asking just out of curiousity. > C#. Visual Studio requires quite a bit of memory; but template-heavy D isn't exactly light on memory either.
Re: Digger 1.0
On Monday, 22 September 2014 at 10:50:51 UTC, Nick Treleaven wrote: AFAICT the test suite needs a separate MSYS install from the one Git uses, e.g. for a newer version of 'diff'. Not sure if that makes it harder for Digger to support. It shouldn't be too hard. The difficult part is getting the environment right (e.g. the DMD test suite needs GNU make.exe but DigitalMars link.exe). Downloading / installing more stuff should be easy. See e.g. the code for the Git installer: https://github.com/CyberShadow/ae/blob/master/sys/install/git.d
Re: Digger 1.0
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 15:24:55 +0200 simendsjo via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > My guess is the average for developers is ~8GB. 2GB RAM is really not > enough for pretty much anything these days - the browser alone easily > chews 3-4GB on moderate use. I recommend you just upgrade your > computer (or compile on a better iron). are your primary language is java? i'm asking just out of curiousity. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Digger 1.0
On 09/22/2014 12:50 PM, Nick Treleaven wrote: (...) > Sometimes my Windows machine with 2 GB RAM gets OOM when trying to link > phobos.lib (I have to close most programs and start again), it would be > nice if there was a way to continue a failed build without starting from > scratch. My guess is the average for developers is ~8GB. 2GB RAM is really not enough for pretty much anything these days - the browser alone easily chews 3-4GB on moderate use. I recommend you just upgrade your computer (or compile on a better iron).
Re: Digger 1.0
On 21/09/2014 18:43, Rainer Schuetze wrote: I tried it on Windows and Digger does an amazing job at installing dependencies. I think we should recommend it as the first thing to run when trying to get your hands on building dmd/phobos. +1 In case someone starts creating patches: Would it be possible to also write a batch file into the repository folder to redo a build of dmd, druntime and phobos without checking all the dependencies? Sometimes my Windows machine with 2 GB RAM gets OOM when trying to link phobos.lib (I have to close most programs and start again), it would be nice if there was a way to continue a failed build without starting from scratch. I also hope there's a way of making the link take less memory, perhaps by making sub-libraries first and linking those together. How about running the test suite? AFAICT the test suite needs a separate MSYS install from the one Git uses, e.g. for a newer version of 'diff'. Not sure if that makes it harder for Digger to support.
Re: Digger 1.0
On Sunday, 21 September 2014 at 17:43:14 UTC, Rainer Schuetze wrote: How about running the test suite? +1 Would make me far more happier of starting seriously getting into dmd bug fixing.
Re: Digger 1.0
On 19.09.2014 03:36, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: Most notable change since DConf is that on Windows, Digger can now build D from source (including x64 versions) without requiring Git or Visual Studio to be installed. It achieves this by downloading and locally installing (unpacking) all the software it needs. Windows binaries: https://github.com/CyberShadow/Digger/releases/tag/1.0 Digger is a tool for working with D's source code and its history. It can build D (including older D versions), customize the build with pending pull requests or forks, and find the exact pull request which introduced a regression (or fixed a bug). It comes together with a web interface which makes building D from source trivial even for people new to D, Git or the command line. https://github.com/CyberShadow/Digger I tried it on Windows and Digger does an amazing job at installing dependencies. I think we should recommend it as the first thing to run when trying to get your hands on building dmd/phobos. In case someone starts creating patches: Would it be possible to also write a batch file into the repository folder to redo a build of dmd, druntime and phobos without checking all the dependencies? How about running the test suite?
Re: Digger 1.0
On Friday, 19 September 2014 at 01:36:54 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: Windows binaries: https://github.com/CyberShadow/Digger/releases/tag/1.0 Yet another release ruined by a DMD -inline wrong-code bug :( Reuploaded new .zip file without -inline.
