This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Converting the gcc backend to a library?
Jamie Lokier wrote:
>
> Martin Dalecki wrote:
> > > > Yes, I do understand that. But my point is that in today's
> > > > single-user workstation environment, how many processes that actually
> > > > would use the GCC shared library would actually be simultaneously
> > > > running in practice? I still believe that number is very small and
> > > > only rarely over one.
> >
> > make -j would start making sense even on single processor system.
>
> It already makes sense if you've enough memory and more than no I/O.
OK:
root:~# size /lib/libc.so.6
text data bss dec hex filename
883468 13004 14620 911092 de6f4 /lib/libc.so.6
root:~# size /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-redhat-linux/2.95.2/cc1
text data bss dec hex filename
1775633 18920 86884 1881437 1cb55d
/usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-redhat-linux/2.95.2/cc1
root:~#
make -j would start making more sense even on single processor systems.
(If mixing C and C++ code).
> The shared library doesn't make any difference -- multiple instances of
> GCC already share pages. It's when you've got GCC statically linked
> into different executables that sharing breaks, because of the different
> offsets in the executables, so that's when you'd find a shared library
> interesting.
>
> -- Jamie
--
Marcin Dalecki