On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 6:08 PM, Lawrence Crowl <cr...@googlers.com> wrote:
>> For many people the time to compile (almost) empty file is very >> important, we are already bad about that right now, initializing >> too much stuff dynamically is going to make it worse. > > So far, we are looking at dynamic initializations that would > take about 10 cycles. Even on a slow processor, a thousand > initializations would take a microsecond. Our time reports don't > even report anything less than 5 milliseconds. > > Is there any reason to believe that this anticipated static > initialization overhead is not pretty low relative to other overhead? > I'm thinking here of the fact that to even start, the driver launches > cc1[plus] which has to parse all the options created by the driver. I agree. I don't think this will be a real problem. If timings show otherwise, we can always change or improve the compiler. Diego.
