2014-04-24 8:31 GMT-04:00 Henri Sivonen <hsivo...@hsivonen.fi>: > I have prepared a queue of patches that removes Netscape-era (circa > 1999) internationalization code that efforts to implement the Encoding > Standard have shown unnecessary to have in Firefox. This makes libxul > on ARMv7 smaller by 181 KB, so that's a win. >
Have we measured the impact of this change on actual memory usage (as opposed to virtual address space size) ? Have we explored how much this problem could be automatically helped by the linker being smart about locality? I totally agree about the value of removing dead code (if only to make the codebase easier to read and maintain), I just wonder if there might be a shortcut to get the short-term memory usage benefits that you mention. Benoit > > However, especially in the context of slimming down our own set of > encoding converters, it's rather demotivating to see that at least on > desktop, we are building ICU encoding converters that we don't use. > See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=944348 . This isn't > even a matter of building code that some might argue we maybe should > use (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=724540). We are even > building ICU encoding converters that we should never use even if we > gave up on our own converters. We're building stuff like BOCU-1 that's > explicitly banned by the HTML spec! (In general, it's uncool that > abandoned researchy stuff like BOCU-1 is included by default in a > widely-used production library like ICU.) > > Questions: > * Are we building and shipping dead code in ICU on B2G? > * The bug about building useless code in ICU has been open since > November. Whose responsibility is it to make sure we stop building > stuff that we don't use in ICU? > * Do we have any mechanisms in place for preventing stuff like the > ICU encoding converters becoming part of the building the future? When > people propose to import third-party code, do reviewers typically ask > if we are importing more than we intend to use? Clearly, considering > that it is hard to get people to remove unused code from the build > after the code has landed, we shouldn't have allowed code like the ICU > encoding converters to become part of the build in the first place? > * How should we identify code that we build but that isn't used anywhere? > * How should we identify code that we build as part of Firefox but is > used only in other apps (Thunderbird, SeaMonkey, etc.)? > * Are there obvious places that people should inspect for code that's > being built but not used? Some libs that got imported for WebRTC > maybe? > > -- > Henri Sivonen > hsivo...@hsivonen.fi > https://hsivonen.fi/ > _______________________________________________ > dev-platform mailing list > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
