Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?

On 24/03/2025 16:56, Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org wrote:

On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 16:49:35 +0000
bart <bc@freeuk.com> wibbled:

On 24/03/2025 16:17, Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org wrote:

*GASP*! 12 whole seconds! How can you cope with your day being interrupted
like that for so long!

>
So applying your 100:1 ratio, you'd spend 20 whole minutes pondering
your next move before compiling again?

 No, because unlike you I understand the concept of splitting into modules
and having a makefile that just rebuilds whats changed, not the entire
codebase.

I said the project used 30 modules. The generated C version is a single module. In that form, it allows gcc to perform whole-program optimisations, for an extra bit of speed, among other benefits like ease of distribution and deployment.

When you have near-instant build times then it's completely different
way of working.

 No it isn't. THat example I gave you built in 0.8 seconds. It would make
zero difference to me if it took 8 or 80.

Really? It could take 80 seconds extra and you would just sit there and take it? Boy you must really like stopping at red lights then.

 

Do you think people who work with scripting languages (or even writing
HTML) would tolerate an exasperating 12-second day between hitting Run,
and their test-run starting?

 In the case of Python they tolerate hopeless performance so who knows.

Perhaps they're sensible enough to use Python where that is not relevant. However when they make a change, they want to see the results NOW. They wouldn't even understand why there need be any delay.
I used to sell an app where half the program and all the GUI was interpreted code. The user wouldn't be aware what they were running.

You really haven't got a clue.

 Says the guy who rebuilds everything from scratch each time.

You're seriously suggesting I should use a makefile so that I can save 0.065 seconds by only compiling one module?
For that matter, why do YOU use a makefile when your full build is only 0.8 seconds?
Fast compilers and also whole-program compilers open up lots of new possibilities. But clearly you're quite happy being stuck in the stone age.
You also seem blissfully content to use slow tools without ever questioning whether they need be that slow. Be interesting to know how slow they can get before even you start complaining.