search for: pr723

Developers: Please visit PR723 http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=723, read it and cast your vote on whether release 1.7 should default the configure script to building optimized or whether the status quo (debug build) should be kept. It is likely that we now have more active users than active developers and we should...

Reid Spencer wrote: > Developers: > > Please visit PR723 http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=723, > read it and cast your vote on whether release 1.7 should default the > configure script to building optimized or whether the status quo (debug > build) should be kept. It is likely that we now have more active users > than active deve...

On Mon, 2006-03-27 at 11:47, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Mon, 27 Mar 2006, John Criswell wrote: > > One consideration to weigh is that a debug build of LLVM provides users with > > more diagnostic information to submit with bug reports (since many bugs are > > caught by assertions, which print a readable stack trace). The tradeoff > > seems to be faster and smaller

On Mon, 27 Mar 2006, John Criswell wrote: > One consideration to weigh is that a debug build of LLVM provides users with > more diagnostic information to submit with bug reports (since many bugs are > caught by assertions, which print a readable stack trace). The tradeoff > seems to be faster and smaller LLVM tools (optimized build) vs. better > diagnostic information for bug

I think using different settings is generally (and this this case too) a bad idea because it makes things more complicated. All developers know how to build LLVM. Most (new/casual) users expect a certain behaviour and they will judge LLVM on subjective grounds. If linking/performance suffers they will continue looking for whatever gives them that extra bit of performance. People like me

On Mon, 27 Mar 2006, Andrew Lenharth wrote: >> Another option is to build an optimized build with assertions on. Do to >> local demand, I added a build option 'make ENABLE_OPTIMIZED=1 >> ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=1' that provides this. > > How does this compare size and performance wise with a debug build or a > release build? I haven't done any scientific

On Mon, 27 Mar 2006, Eric van Riet Paap wrote: > I think using different settings is generally (and this this case too) a bad > idea because it makes things more complicated. All developers know how to > build LLVM. Most (new/casual) users expect a certain behaviour and they will > judge LLVM on subjective grounds. If linking/performance suffers they will > continue looking for

Hello LLVM, During this sprint we will also look at using LLVM JIT for our project. What exactly we will do in Tokyo very much depends on who will attend. So if you are interested please contact me beforehand so we can make sure everyone will have a fun and productive time. cheers, Eric van Riet Paap Tokyo PyPy Sprint: 23rd - 29th April 2006