|
00:00
lizmat joined
01:00
lizmat joined
01:47
ilbot3 joined
06:33
domidumont joined
06:36
Ven joined
06:38
Ven joined,
domidumont joined
08:21
leont joined
08:25
lizmat_ joined
|
|||
| leont | jnthn: MVM_SPESH_OSR_DISABLE=1 doesn't fix it | 08:52 | |
|
09:07
tomboy64 joined
|
|||
| tomboy64 | i have a suggested patch for moarvm's Configure.pl: bpaste.net/show/e6d9849d7d77 | 09:11 | |
| also, is lua a build-time only dependency? | |||
| lizmat | tomboy64: afaik, jnthn will accept PR's on moarvm :-) | 09:12 | |
| tomboy64 | :) | ||
| i'd still like some feedback on it here | 09:13 | ||
| lizmat | I assume ExtUtils::PkgConfig is P5 core ? | 09:14 | |
| timotimo | yeah, lua is only needed at build-time, and even then we could distribute the files it spits out with a release or in a distro package | 09:15 | |
| tomboy64 | hmm. actually i don't think so. at least my distro (gentoo) lists it as a cpan package | ||
| as a regular cpan package | 09:16 | ||
| timotimo: that's not necessary. | |||
| timotimo | that's bad; so far we've only depended on core perl5 - and a really old version of perl5 at that | ||
| lizmat | so that would add a prereq | ||
| tomboy64 | okay. could i depend on native pkg-config then? | 09:17 | |
| because otherwise i wouldn't get a path like -I/usr/lib64/libffi-3.2.1/include | 09:19 | ||
| timotimo | you could; that's easier to have a fallback for, IMO | 09:20 | |
| a shell-out failing is easier than a module use failing, i mean | |||
| tomboy64 | :-} how do i do a shell call in perl? | 09:21 | |
| timotimo | in perl5 i don't know ... but our configure stuff already does lots of shelling out to figure out things regarding the C compiler | 09:22 | |
| psch | tomboy64: system() for the exit code and exec() for the output iirc | 09:23 | |
| tomboy64 | psch: so i would effectively run things twice? | ||
| psch | tomboy64: well, if you actually need both (as in, the output carries different information than the exit code), yes | 09:24 | |
| timotimo | why doesn't perl5 core have something for that purpose? | ||
| er, why *wouldn't* | |||
| as in: it's gotta have that, right? otherwise it'd be strange | 09:25 | ||
| psch | www.perlhowto.com/executing_external_commands | 09:26 | |
| exec() probably is the wrong tool | |||
| i'm not really a perl5 programmer... :) | |||
| timotimo | huh. how do you figure out if a program fails later on with the open approach? | 09:27 | |
| i see it's easy to figure out if/that it couldn't be started, as in: binary doesn't exist | |||
| maybe you close the file handle you opened and that then has a return value? | 09:28 | ||
| tomboy64 | thanks guys | 09:29 | |
| that should actually make things work | 09:30 | ||
|
09:43
leont joined
10:07
Ven joined
10:24
Ven joined
11:22
leont joined
11:24
flaviusb joined
12:50
leont joined
13:53
Ven joined
14:30
zakharyas joined
14:46
Ven joined
15:22
zakharyas joined
17:11
Ven joined
|
|||
| timotimo | gcc.gnu.org/wiki/AutoFDO - are we interested in this at all? | 17:37 | |
| lizmat | with the rate of disappearing gcc support on the various distributions, I wonder how much it would be worth | 17:39 | |
| timotimo | oh, is clang seriously replacing gcc in some places? | 17:40 | |
| that'd be catastrophic for moarvm build times | |||
| arnsholt | Are there any Linux distros replacing GCC with clang? | 17:41 | |
| I think I've heard of fBSD talking about something like that, but not any Linux distros | |||
| lizmat | well, OSX comes to mind | 17:45 | |
| timotimo | well, apple is heavily investing into llvm and clang anyway | 17:46 | |
| leont | From what I head clang is also becoming the standard in BSD land, but in Linux not so much | 17:50 | |
| It doesn't help that recent g++ and clang++ aren't compatible :-/ | 17:51 | ||
| arnsholt | Yeah, and OS X | 17:55 | |
| They've swapped out a fair bit of software due to GPL3 | |||
| leont | Quite | 17:57 | |
| geekosaur | fbsd replaced gcc with clang as of 9.3-RELEASE and 10.0-RELEASE | 18:19 | |
| BinGOs | 9.x has clang as well as gcc and the default compiler (cc) is gcc | 18:22 | |
| but yeah, gcc was gone from 10.0 and cc was clang | |||
| geekosaur | sorry I meant 9.4 not 9.3 which was still gcc | 18:26 | |
| and it looiks like it's not actually released yet despite references to it around the net :/ thought it had happened already. in any case 9-STABLE has gone clang for the base system and the next release will use it | 18:29 | ||
| orbus_ | out of curiosity, why is it that moarvm builds so much slower on clang? have the specific pain points ever been identified? | 18:32 | |
| timotimo | it's interp.c | ||
| it has a gigantic amount of named labels | 18:33 | ||
| arnsholt | Have we reported it to the clang bugtracker? | 18:34 | |
| timotimo | no clue. i've done nothing like that | ||
| orbus | it has a lot, but it doesn't seem like *that* many | ||
| timotimo | clang certainly takes its time compiling it | 18:35 | |
| we should probably do individual timings to make sure it is really interp.c that is the problematic one | |||
| and not just everything being equally slower | |||
| travis-ci.org/MoarVM/MoarVM - here you can compare clang vs gcc | |||
| 2:46 vs 9:42 | 18:36 | ||
| 2:55 vs 10:47 | |||
| orbus | hrm | 18:37 | |
| I did a build on freebsd with clang a while back | |||
| I don't remember it being super duper slow | |||
| but maybe I just walked away while it was compiling | |||
| geekosaur | clang does have its known pain points re compile speed | 18:38 | |
| one of the worst examples is part of llvm, so they definitely know about it | |||
| orbus | maybe they just figure people will throw more hardware at it if compile time matters to them | 18:42 | |
| timotimo | or, you know, just develop on linux or windows :) | 18:43 | |
| orbus | hmm | 18:46 | |
| looks like stock linux kernel won't build on clang | |||
| but there's a project producing patches that looks they can make it work | 18:47 | ||
| timotimo | that's useful | ||
| orbus | but probably why linux distros aren't moving towards it | ||
| timotimo | yeah | ||
| orbus | this was from last year but I'm not sure that the situation's changed much | 18:50 | |
| www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news...ernel-2015 | |||
| geekosaur | I think a lot of the air got sucked out of that project whern gcc fixed its performance issues in 4.9 | 19:02 | |
| after Linus caught it doing some pathetically stupid things | |||
| timotimo | hah, our code generator and optimizers are like that, too ... in some parts :) | 19:03 | |
| geekosaur | but we're not on version 4.9 :) | ||
|
19:03
cognominal joined
|
|||
| timotimo | with something as gigantic as a compiler, it's hard to look at every nook and cranny unless you have good tests that you can look at the compiler with | 19:03 | |
| masak | another blog post for all you GC lovers out there: v8project.blogspot.se/2016/04/jank-...inoco.html | 19:38 | |
|
19:47
Ven joined
|
|||
| moritz | masak: good read, thanks | 19:52 | |
|
20:53
leont joined
21:30
leont_ joined
22:28
leont_ joined
|
|||