Re: else ladders practice

Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:

On 26/11/2024 12:29, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>

Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>

On 25/11/2024 18:49, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>

Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>

It's funny how nobody seems to care about the speed of compilers
(which can vary by 100:1), but for the generated programs, the 2:1
speedup you might get by optimising it is vital!

>
I think most people would rather take this path (these times
are actual measured times of a recently written program):
>
      compile time:       1 second
      program run time:   ~7 hours
>
than this path (extrapolated using the ratios mentioned above):
>
      compile time:       0.01 second
      program run time:   ~14 hours

>
I'm trying to think of some computationally intensive app that would
run non-stop for several hours without interaction.

>
The conclusion is the same whether the program run time
is 7 hours, 7 minutes, or 7 seconds.

>
Funny you should mention 7 seconds.  If I'm working on single source
file called sql.c for example, that's how long it takes for gcc to
create an unoptimised executable:
>
  c:\cx>tm gcc sql.c            #250Kloc file
  TM:  7.38

Your example illustrates my point.  Even 250 thousand lines of
source takes only a few seconds to compile.  Only people nutty
enough to have single source files over 25,000 lines or so --
over 400 pages at 60 lines/page! -- are so obsessed about
compilation speed.  And of course you picked the farthest-most
outlier as your example, grossly misrepresenting any sort of
average or typical case.