Yes and in fact if you look into GCC there is more checking code than most people think because most of the time in a released compiler these checks are not enabled. (--disable-checking). In fact in some cases even on the main development some checking is not enabled by default because it just take so long (like 5 days) to just bootstrap the compiler. I am taking about gcac checking. Also RTL checking takes a long time too.
--enable-checking=assert,fold,gc,gcac,misc,rtlfl ag,rtl,tree is fun as it takes 5 days to build a compiler even on a fast computer.
But you are comparing apples and oranges. since glibc is much bigger than mscorlib.dll really. Also you have the overhead of make involved and assembling and linking. Yes GCC can be made faster but you are still comparing apples to oranges in terms of size. glibc is huge. Oh by the way glibc is not part of GCC at all.
Well here is the problem of Mono from a GCC prospective: Why another back-end, yes GCC does not support JIT but you could have used LLVM for that. Another thing is Mono developers don't seem to listen to some of the GCC developers when it comes to algorithms, one example is their PRE implementation is based on much slower and not as good algorithm as the one which GCC uses GVN/PRE.
From gcj prospective: (again) Why another back-end? Why another ABI, instead of hooking gcj and Mono together, there is another static ABI?
Seems like Napster is forgetting that they are free songs on iTunes and a new one comes out every week. So it would take 10,000 weeks, which is about 192 years but then still don't have to pay $10,000 to file up your iPod. And there are more than just one free song per week so it is a lot less than 10,000 weeks. Plus you can buy 15 songs per month and that makes it about 44 years to fill up your iPod (assuming a month is 4 weeks and you get the free song).
I do contribute to GCC, look for my name in ChangeLog. I am also a GCC bug master who goes through each and every new bug which is opened so I know where the problems are usually.
And my first comments were supposed to be taken as a joke and not seriously.
Really Tiemann needs to fix more G++ bugs which he introduced when he wrote the code. The code has many slow places where he used a crapy O(n^2) algorithm instead of an O(n) one.
FreeBSD got more than just a number of testsuites. Also gdb gets some patches every once in a while. Now thing about GCC is that some of the patches were submitted but were rejected for one reason or another and people at Apple have time constraint (like everyother person) so they did not update it. Also you cannot ignore other smaller projects Apple has contributed to, or in some cases created.
Also a note about IBM, most people don't know but IBM has been contributing to GCC since well the EGCS split. A person from IBM was on the EGCS steering committee from the start.
Also RedHat bought Cygnus which is where most of the contributing parts of RedHat comes from.
For one thing, its main purpose was to allow various agencies the legal right to share information. If the CIA knew for a fact that an attack on the US was going to happen before the PATRIOT ACT it would have been *ILLEGAL* for them to tell the FBI, the White House, etc. That's insanity!
Considering that the CIA is run by the white house and not the congress (just like the FBI), this is just plainly wrong. Remember the Executive branch is suposed to execute the law and not make it, this is even more wrong.
The maintainer of gcc at that time was one person, Kenner, who said everytime someone submitted a patch, he would do a better patch next week. That is the reason for the split. Overly conservative is not the world for this, it was just plain stupid and a political mess.
And it was more than just the cygnus people, it was also IBM and the fortran maintainer and other people too (yes IBM was involved with GCC before 1999) who founded EGCS, see about some of the history of EGCS project and GCC.
SSP is also called propolice. The writter of it submitted it against a release branch which was the main reason why it got rejected and it was too big to review.
Most of the time with GCC, the problem is the person is not following the rules when submitting the patch, mainly submitting a new feature against a release branch. (ssp is an example of this).
I should know I was an intern there and I was doing some skunk works too.
Just use BSD or Linux or OS X, forget about wins
on
Bugzilla on Windows?
·
· Score: -1, Redundant
Just setup a BSD or Linux box in secret or even at home first. And then show management, how easy it is. There is no point in going through the mess of setting up windows as bugzilla server.
IIRC he was not using any SCM at all so yes using one in gneral will help. CVS for me was able to get my team about 10x better (but then again I did most of the work anyways and this was for class). But anything not using a SCM will be helped by using one.
Most optimizations break code because developers do not follow the standard of a language. For an example -fstrict-aliasing breaks code because people do not follow aliasing rules for the language which they are using. The Linux kernel does not follow them so they have to do -fno-strict-aliasing. Note this flags was truned on by defualt at -O2 for 2.95 and 2.95.1 but turned off for 2.95.3 and then reenabled for 3.0 while people fix their code. Most people have fixed their code but some code out there still violates these rules, the Linux kernel is just one of them.
More to that point, Linus now has a Power Mac G5 so the mainline sources for Linux has to be kept up todate.
MP4 (via quicktime)
on
Real Problems
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
What about some standards, MPEG 4 is very standarized and should be used. Quicktime plays it, IIRC Real also plays it so people have choices of what player they can use.
You cannot boot directly from OF (openfirmware) into Linux. Wrong, OF is a really a boot loader and can load any ELF or xcoff binary from many different file system formats, hfs, hfs+, ISO CD, ext2, and ufs.
Also OF can read both partion maps, Apple format and x86 format.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes and in fact if you look into GCC there is more checking code than most people think because most of the time in a released compiler these checks are not enabled. (--disable-checking). In fact in some cases even on the main development some checking is not enabled by default because it just take so long (like 5 days) to just bootstrap the compiler. I am taking about gcac checking. Also RTL checking takes a long time too.
l ag ,rtl,tree is fun as it takes 5 days to build a compiler even on a fast computer.
--enable-checking=assert,fold,gc,gcac,misc,rtlf
But you are comparing apples and oranges. since glibc is much bigger than mscorlib.dll really. Also you have the overhead of make involved and assembling and linking. Yes GCC can be made faster but you are still comparing apples to oranges in terms of size. glibc is huge. Oh by the way glibc is not part of GCC at all.
Well here is the problem of Mono from a GCC prospective:
Why another back-end, yes GCC does not support JIT but you could have used LLVM for that.
Another thing is Mono developers don't seem to listen to some of the GCC developers when it comes to algorithms, one example is their PRE implementation is based on much slower and not as good algorithm as the one which GCC uses GVN/PRE.
From gcj prospective:
(again) Why another back-end?
Why another ABI, instead of hooking gcj and Mono together, there is another static ABI?
Seems like Napster is forgetting that they are free songs on iTunes and a new one comes out every week. So it would take 10,000 weeks, which is about 192 years but then still don't have to pay $10,000 to file up your iPod. And there are more than just one free song per week so it is a lot less than 10,000 weeks.
Plus you can buy 15 songs per month and that makes it about 44 years to fill up your iPod (assuming a month is 4 weeks and you get the free song).
I do contribute to GCC, look for my name in ChangeLog. I am also a GCC bug master who goes through each and every new bug which is opened so I know where the problems are usually.
And my first comments were supposed to be taken as a joke and not seriously.
Yes he wrote teh C++ front-end, but almost all of the code he wrote is gone now, rewritten to be better. All of the code he wrote was crap code.
Really Tiemann needs to fix more G++ bugs which he introduced when he wrote the code. The code has many slow places where he used a crapy O(n^2) algorithm instead of an O(n) one.
FreeBSD got more than just a number of testsuites. Also gdb gets some patches every once in a while. Now thing about GCC is that some of the patches were submitted but were rejected for one reason or another and people at Apple have time constraint (like everyother person) so they did not update it. Also you cannot ignore other smaller projects Apple has contributed to, or in some cases created.
Also a note about IBM, most people don't know but IBM has been contributing to GCC since well the EGCS split. A person from IBM was on the EGCS steering committee from the start.
Also RedHat bought Cygnus which is where most of the contributing parts of RedHat comes from.
actually Apple would have died because the PPC would not have got started. POWER would be still stuck there and no 64bit processor at this point.
For one thing, its main purpose was to allow various agencies the legal right to share information. If the CIA knew for a fact that an attack on the US was going to happen before the PATRIOT ACT it would have been *ILLEGAL* for them to tell the FBI, the White House, etc. That's insanity!
Considering that the CIA is run by the white house and not the congress (just like the FBI), this is just plainly wrong. Remember the Executive branch is suposed to execute the law and not make it, this is even more wrong.
Actually the 970 has the feature already, witness the IBM blade server.
The maintainer of gcc at that time was one person, Kenner, who said everytime someone submitted a patch, he would do a better patch next week. That is the reason for the split. Overly conservative is not the world for this, it was just plain stupid and a political mess.
And it was more than just the cygnus people, it was also IBM and the fortran maintainer and other people too (yes IBM was involved with GCC before 1999) who founded EGCS, see about some of the history of EGCS project and GCC.
SSP is also called propolice. The writter of it submitted it against a release branch which was the main reason why it got rejected and it was too big to review.
Most of the time with GCC, the problem is the person is not following the rules when submitting the patch, mainly submitting a new feature against a release branch. (ssp is an example of this).
I should know I was an intern there and I was doing some skunk works too.
Just setup a BSD or Linux box in secret or even at home first. And then show management, how easy it is.
There is no point in going through the mess of setting up windows as bugzilla server.
This is very old news, this was decided about two to three months ago (or even longer) on the gcc list.
IIRC he was not using any SCM at all so yes using one in gneral will help. CVS for me was able to get my team about 10x better (but then again I did most of the work anyways and this was for class).
But anything not using a SCM will be helped by using one.
Most optimizations break code because developers do not follow the standard of a language. For an example -fstrict-aliasing breaks code because people do not follow aliasing rules for the language which they are using. The Linux kernel does not follow them so they have to do -fno-strict-aliasing. Note this flags was truned on by defualt at -O2 for 2.95 and 2.95.1 but turned off for 2.95.3 and then reenabled for 3.0 while people fix their code. Most people have fixed their code but some code out there still violates these rules, the Linux kernel is just one of them.
This is a dup of a much older article here on slashdot.
But since slashdot has rejected my two attemps of real new news about GCC, I am not surprised.
2004-04-25 14:40:41 GCC 3.4.0 released (developers,programming) (rejected)
2004-04-23 12:38:20 GCC 3.4.0 released (developers,programming) (rejected)
http://public.srce.hr/vrml/html/experts/binary/?
?
More than just that we also had a binary format for VRML also, which was based on Quickdraw3D's format IIRC.
More to that point, Linus now has a Power Mac G5 so the mainline sources for Linux has to be kept up todate.
What about some standards, MPEG 4 is very standarized and should be used. Quicktime plays it, IIRC Real also plays it so people have choices of what player they can use.
You cannot boot directly from OF (openfirmware) into Linux. Wrong, OF is a really a boot loader and can load any ELF or xcoff binary from many different file system formats, hfs, hfs+, ISO CD, ext2, and ufs.
Also OF can read both partion maps, Apple format and x86 format.
Of course you can still use yaboot if you want.