George <greerga@CIRCLEMUD.ORG> writes:
> >If you're adding a function, not necessarily. If you're changing the
> >return value, or the parameters to a function, then you've got other
> >changes ahead most likely.
>
> But not necessarily to every file though.
No, but quite a few of them if it is a frequently called function.
> >> It is for many people, and especially C++.
> >
> >Circle isn't C++. gcc takes quite a bit of memory, regardless of the
> >size of the file. It has a good deal of overhead.
>
> A 486 with 4MB of RAM or even 8MB would enjoy less memory used. Granted you
> wouldn't run the MUD on it but people may still develop on it.
That is very much my point. Not so much peoples' machines, but
instead, the servers the muds are running on. I still highly doubt,
though that the headers will cause a problem. I'd say every .c file
in stock ends up including maybe 80% of the headers, by line. But
that could br wrong, just a hunch.
> >Leaving optimization off in all but the final stages of a production
> >build is generally a good thing -- besides, optimization has been
> >known to cause problems in otherwise good code. And as I said, Circle
> >being so IO bound, optimization has a stunted impact right from the start.
>
> If optimization causes bad code, your compiler is broken. It's been known
> to happen with 'gcc' occaisonally (2.7.2 and 2.6.3) but you don't change
> your code just because of that.
Optimization can't always be relied on. People use old compilers,
broken compilers, whatever. Depending on gcc to optimize code is
ridiculous -- it does a fairly decent job on local levels, but not on
algorithmic levels and above.
> >Surely you're not denying that memory is cheap and drive space is
> >cheap compared to 6 months ago? A year ago? Progress moves. We
> >should keep up with the mean.
>
> I'm happy with my 486/50 laptop thank you very much. I'm not about to go
> plunk down $2,000 just to 'keep up with the mean.'
No, but sooner or later, you will need to upgrade. Circlemud should
keep up with the mean. I'm not saying we as coders should. The mean
is what our machines currently are, which I would wager in most cases
is enough to have a 20 or 30k increase in compile-time memory ;)
--
James Turner turnerjh@xtn.net
http://www.vuse.vanderbilt.edu/~turnerj1/
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
| http://democracy.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list-faq.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/15/00 PST