This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcc compile-time performance
- From: Phil Edwards <phil at jaj dot com>
- To: Stan Shebs <shebs at apple dot com>
- Cc: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>, Dara Hazeghi <dhazeghi at pacbell dot net>, Neil Booth <neil at daikokuya dot demon dot co dot uk>, Andi Kleen <ak at suse dot de>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 12:29:57 -0400
- Subject: Re: gcc compile-time performance
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0205171159420.5015-100000@dberlin.org> <3CE52EFB.68C0809D@apple.com>
On Fri, May 17, 2002 at 09:25:32AM -0700, Stan Shebs wrote:
> Then there's the extreme approach of having maintainers only
> accept patches that either remove code or make the compiler run
> faster... :-)
In D&E, I think, Stroustrup tells a story of a suggestion made during the
early C++ standardization meetings that anybody proposing an extension must
also propose a feature removal. Then a suggestion was made that anybody
proposing an extension must donate a kidney; it would hopefully force
people to consider extensions more carefully, and at most a single person
could only propose two really bad extensions. Everybody liked this idea.
--
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater
than the animating contest for freedom, go home and leave us in peace. We seek
not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you;
and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. - Samuel Adams