Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "mcbloatfac".
Did you mean:
mcbloatface
2018 Mar 17
0
[cfe-dev] Clang executable sizes and build stats
...sure yet. This would be an interesting case for us as we
don't really need to support any models other than Jaguar for our users but
don't want to break the LLVM tests, nor introduce loads of private changes
to our branch.
I know our test/QA team have been doing some analysis using Bloaty
McBloatFace to see exactly where the size is coming from and produced some
really nice visualizations of that data. They've also been looking at how
the MinSizeRelease config does on Windows. I think the size savings were
decent but I'm not sure of performance numbers, if they have any yet.
I'll...
2018 Mar 17
2
[cfe-dev] Clang executable sizes and build stats
...nteresting case for us as we
> don't really need to support any models other than Jaguar for our users but
> don't want to break the LLVM tests, nor introduce loads of private changes
> to our branch.
>
> I know our test/QA team have been doing some analysis using Bloaty
> McBloatFace to see exactly where the size is coming from and produced some
> really nice visualizations of that data. They've also been looking at how
> the MinSizeRelease config does on Windows. I think the size savings were
> decent but I'm not sure of performance numbers, if they have any...
2018 Mar 17
2
Clang executable sizes and build stats
Hi all,
I recently did a run where I built clang executables on FreeBSD 12-CURRENT [1], from trunk r250000 (2015-10-11) all through r327700 (2018-03-16), with increments of 100 revisions. This is mainly meant as an archive, for easily doing bisections, but there are also some interesting statistics.
From r250000 through r327700:
* the total (stripped) executable size grew by approximately 43%
*
2018 Mar 21
0
[cfe-dev] Clang executable sizes and build stats
...This would be an interesting case for us as we don't really need to support any models other than Jaguar for our users but don't want to break the LLVM tests, nor introduce loads of private changes to our branch.
>
> I know our test/QA team have been doing some analysis using Bloaty McBloatFace to see exactly where the size is coming from and produced some really nice visualizations of that data. They've also been looking at how the MinSizeRelease config does on Windows. I think the size savings were decent but I'm not sure of performance numbers, if they have any yet.
>
>...
2018 Mar 22
1
[cfe-dev] Clang executable sizes and build stats
...s we
>> don't really need to support any models other than Jaguar for our users but
>> don't want to break the LLVM tests, nor introduce loads of private changes
>> to our branch.
>>
>> I know our test/QA team have been doing some analysis using Bloaty
>> McBloatFace to see exactly where the size is coming from and produced some
>> really nice visualizations of that data. They've also been looking at how
>> the MinSizeRelease config does on Windows. I think the size savings were
>> decent but I'm not sure of performance numbers, if t...