Re: Baby X is bor nagain

On 25/06/2024 17:08, Scott Lurndal wrote:

bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:

On 25/06/2024 14:48, Scott Lurndal wrote:

 

That's why in my original post in this sub-thread, in order to give
a feeling of the size of compiler's job I gave the size of text
segment rather than size of the elf.
The size of text segment is, of course, not a good measure of
compiler's job, esp. when we are trying to compare compile jobs for
different target architectures, but it is less bad than any alternative
measure [that is not too hard to gather] that I can think of.
If you can think about anything better, please tell us.

>
Does the compiled code meet functional and performance  specifications?
>
That's the only criteria that matters.  Size of the executable
and compilation speed are basically irrelevent metrics in my
experience.

>
If apparently anything goes,

 I never said that.
 

and you don't care how slow a tool is or

 I never said that.
 

how big its output, how do you detect unnecessary bloat?

 I don't write programs with unnecessary bloat.
 

>
How do you detect gratuitous use of machine resources?

 I write code that doesn't gratuitously use machine resources.
 

These answers apply to me tool.

>
BTW since you and DB are both keen on products like Python,

 I have never posted anything about python here, that I recall.
 I use it very infrequently.
 

I /do/ use Python.  I use it when it is an appropriate language to use,   which is very different circumstances from when I use C (or C++). Different tools for different tasks.