* Josh Triplett wrote on Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 06:02:36PM CEST: > Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > > Curious: can you please state which Libtool version you timed against, > > and if not 2.2.x, redo timing against 2.2.2? Not that I expect wonders, > > but I expect something better than what you measured. > > I tested against 1.5.26. I'll give 2.2.2 a shot and see what I find. > However, when I looked at 2.2.2, it still seems to have a > multi-thousand-line shell script; do you just expect the benefit to > come from the new shell-specific optimizations?
Partly, yes. And Ross showed that we already got half the way, and yes, the compile mode improvements are the biggest: <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.devel.general/126905/focus=9125> Libtool 2.2.2 in compile mode uses only 6 forks in compile mode if your shell has XSI features. Another thing to keep in mind is to put func_mode_compile early in the script, and outside of conditionals, so that the shell doesn't even have to parse anything below that. That gave the biggest speedup on GNU/Linux (where forks are relatively cheap). <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.libtool.patches/7230> That message also shows timings for a separated libtool-link script, beyond which I then saw no further performance improvements. I guess I could try to dig out that old patch (which was never applied). Also, I see two more low-hanging fruits at the moment. Will follow up with patches later tonight or tomorrow night. Cheers, Ralf _______________________________________________ http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
