Steven Bosscher writes: > On Monday 11 April 2005 12:18, Andrew Haley wrote: > > Mark Mitchell writes: > > > Your primary objective (get rid of -fno-unit-at-a-time) is one that I > > > strongly support. > > > > I have a problem with getting rid of -fno-unit-at-a-time. Sometimes > > we compile huge Java programs; however, keeping all the method bodies > > consumes vast amouts of memory. > > This is what C++ does now too. Why would this be a problem > for Java but not for C++?
I don't know why it's not a problem for C++; I do know why it's a problem for Java. Perhaps the files we're compiling are larger. Certainly jarfiles can get to be very large, and once gcc's store starts to exceed the size of physical memory things can get very painful. Andrew.
