Good deal. Issue opened at https://github.com/golang/go/issues/18602 and I
attached code to replicate.
On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 at 3:31:11 PM UTC-6, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 9:47 AM, >
> wrote:
> >
> > Is there any value in me reporting it? If helpful, I may be
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 9:47 AM, wrote:
>
> Is there any value in me reporting it? If helpful, I may be able to toss a
> large tarball up on Dropbox or something. It's not really high priority for
> me either tbh because I know it would be difficult to stream the compilation
> inside the same pac
Is there any value in me reporting it? If helpful, I may be able to toss a
large tarball up on Dropbox or something. It's not really high priority for
me either tbh because I know it would be difficult to stream the
compilation inside the same package w/ circular refs and therefore may not
be f
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 9:22 AM, wrote:
>
> Just as an update, Go 1.8 doesn't help much, and the compile flags do reduce
> memory usage which only extends the inevitable time it runs out of memory. I
> guess I am at a loss here. I suppose this is not considered a bug, correct?
> Just a practical
Just as an update, Go 1.8 doesn't help much, and the compile flags do
reduce memory usage which only extends the inevitable time it runs out of
memory. I guess I am at a loss here. I suppose this is not considered a
bug, correct? Just a practical limitation of the compiler to use more
memory pr
In my case, many of the functions are very small (many only a single line
that I'm hoping will be inlined). This is a transpiler from another
language (Java) akin to Grumpy (Python) and many of the functions are
single-line dispatch methods to support OOP. The transpiler is at
https://github.co
One thing to keep in mind: generated-code compilation time issues can
sometimes be due to a large function (or functions) as opposed just the
total volume of code in the package.
For example, https://github.com/golang/go/issues/16407 demonstrates a
compile-time problem that sounds a bit like what
It does matter for my use case, but not for these first steps. Thanks. I
think still, practically, I need to reduce the code size unfortunately.
On Monday, January 9, 2017 at 12:24:36 PM UTC-6, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 9:00 AM, > wrote:
> > I have a really really large
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 9:00 AM, wrote:
> I have a really really large package of code that was generated via a code
> generator. Granted the main code that references it I expect to remove a lot
> via DCE or something so the binaries wouldn't be extreme. The code is >
> 140MB in the single packag
I have a really really large package of code that was generated via a code
generator. Granted the main code that references it I expect to remove a
lot via DCE or something so the binaries wouldn't be extreme. The code is >
140MB in the single package which I know sounds extreme. Let's ignore
p
10 matches
Mail list logo
