Subject: Re: proposal: libcc1 -> static
To: Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU>
From: Hauke Fath <hauke@Espresso.Rhein-Neckar.DE>
Date: 01/02/1999 18:36:38
At 14:36 Uhr +0100 02.01.1999, Robert Elz wrote:
>I would note however that disk space is a finite
>resource, if you have insufficient, there is little you can do (including
>rebuild). On the other hand, CPU time is unbounded, if that is the resource
>to optimise, then spending some of it rebuilding the compiler ought not be
>too much of a problem.
Sounds somewhat academic to me.
o These days, I can get disk space at around 10 MB/DEM. I'd have a hard
time, though, bumping my Mac IIci's cpu speed -- I could get an accelerated
cpu board that would definitely cost me more than, say, a used 1G disk. And
nothing will bump my Quadra 700's 33 MHz.
o Many people out there have difficulties with turning knobs on cc and
rebuilding userland even if they have gotten fluent in building kernels.
They may look at, say, a IIci or a IIsi, find it too slow for any serious
work and get a 486 box.
So, I strongly second Scott's position.
"It's never straight up and down" (DEVO)