On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 09:38:49PM +0000, Kamil Rytarowski via Phabricator via cfe-commits wrote: > I think that this place is not the right place to bash GNU ld for performance > issues.
I didn't. > I will refer just to slides and paper from Ian Lance Taylor to get overview > why it is unacceptably slow: > > https://www.airs.com/ian/gold-slides.pdf > https://ai.google/research/pubs/pub34417.pdf We all know that gold and lld are faster. It's a huge step from "somewhat faster" to "unacceptably slow". But that's again a completely separate topic. > I will add that (unless nothing changed recently) ignoring lack of > features (like thinlto) GNU ld cannot produce >=4GB executables and > this makes it even more unusable. That sounds seriously like a troll. I already mentioned DWARF fission for the one reasonable case for > 100MB binaries and that's in short "don't touch most of the data"... Joerg _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
