On 07/23/2012 05:04 AM, Lubos Lunak wrote:
Where's the benchmark for that? I'd like to see what difference it makes, but
I cannot find anything in the blog post.
Good question. I didn't put benchmark data in because I wanted to first
get the background story out first, which I knew was goi
Hi Lubos,
On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 11:04 +0200, Lubos Lunak wrote:
> > But no doubt more work is ahead to further optimize this structure.
>
> Where's the benchmark for that? I'd like to see what difference it makes,
> but
> I cannot find anything in the blog post.
Benchmark ? as in a hu
On Thursday 19 of July 2012, Michael Meeks wrote:
> Having said that, I totally agree, our problems are 95% algorithmic,
> and fiddling with compiler optimiser settings is the last refuge of the
> desperate man ;-)
>
> The thing that concerns me about gcc vs. MSVC++ is not the speed of
On Saturday 21 of July 2012, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
> On 07/19/2012 11:26 AM, Michael Meeks wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 16:04 +0200, Michael Stahl wrote:
> >> i'm saying it doesn't benefit from the "sophisticated" optimizations
> >> that vendor compilers like SunStudio or Intel do that speed up
On 07/19/2012 11:26 AM, Michael Meeks wrote:
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 16:04 +0200, Michael Stahl wrote:
i'm saying it doesn't benefit from the "sophisticated" optimizations that
vendor compilers like SunStudio or Intel do that speed up your BLAS
stuff with gigabytes of floating point arrays by X t
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Michael Stahl wrote:
> On 20/07/12 16:31, Yi Ding wrote:
>> Fair point. :-) Let me see if I can get a build working on Windows
>> this weekend. I see on the wiki that building with VS 2010 is not yet
>> supported:
>>
>> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Developme
On 20/07/12 16:31, Yi Ding wrote:
> Fair point. :-) Let me see if I can get a build working on Windows
> this weekend. I see on the wiki that building with VS 2010 is not yet
> supported:
>
> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Windows_Build_Dependencies
>
> Is this information still
Fair point. :-) Let me see if I can get a build working on Windows
this weekend. I see on the wiki that building with VS 2010 is not yet
supported:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Windows_Build_Dependencies
Is this information still current?
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 3:43 AM, Micha
Hi there,
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 11:21 -0500, Yi Ding wrote:
> +1 ...
> +1 ...
> +1 ...
Thanks for your encouragement, but this is a developers list :-) which
of these do you want to work on ? There is low-hanging fruit everywhere
for developers to focus on - which would you like to look i
+1 on considering startup performance/memory usage. It looks like
with Office 13 Microsoft has done more work in getting Office to
startup faster (no benchmarks, just anecdotal experience).
+1 on the ability to do some kind of cross-compiling solution in parallel.
+1 on gigabyte spreadsheets of
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 16:04 +0200, Michael Stahl wrote:
> i'm saying it doesn't benefit from the "sophisticated" optimizations that
> vendor compilers like SunStudio or Intel do that speed up your BLAS
> stuff with gigabytes of floating point arrays by X times because office
> suites don't contain
On 19/07/12 14:59, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 7:45 AM, Michael Stahl wrote:
>
>> i don't believe an office suite will benefit all that much from
>> sophisticated compiler optimizations;
>
> It's certainly your opinion. But I tend think that, any binary
> generated from a comp
On 07/19/2012 09:49 AM, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 08:59:34AM -0400, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 7:45 AM, Michael Stahl wrote:
i don't believe an office suite will benefit all that much from
sophisticated compiler optimizations;
It's certainly your opi
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 08:59:34AM -0400, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 7:45 AM, Michael Stahl wrote:
>
> > i don't believe an office suite will benefit all that much from
> > sophisticated compiler optimizations;
>
> It's certainly your opinion. But I tend think that, any binar
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 7:45 AM, Michael Stahl wrote:
> i don't believe an office suite will benefit all that much from
> sophisticated compiler optimizations;
It's certainly your opinion. But I tend think that, any binary
generated from a compiler could use the benefit of compiler
optimization.
On 17/07/12 21:21, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
> On 07/17/2012 05:11 AM, Lubos Lunak wrote:
>> So, as long as we require to build LO with MSVC, we can revisit the
>> question
>> of hard-depending on C++11 in, uhm, let's be optimistic and say 3 years. IOW,
>> we can probably get there faster by ditching
2012/7/17 Kohei Yoshida :
> On 07/17/2012 05:11 AM, Lubos Lunak wrote:
>>
>> So, as long as we require to build LO with MSVC, we can revisit the
>> question
>> of hard-depending on C++11 in, uhm, let's be optimistic and say 3 years.
>> IOW,
>> we can probably get there faster by ditching backward
On 07/17/2012 05:11 AM, Lubos Lunak wrote:
So, as long as we require to build LO with MSVC, we can revisit the question
of hard-depending on C++11 in, uhm, let's be optimistic and say 3 years. IOW,
we can probably get there faster by ditching backwards ABI compatibility with
LO4 and switching t
On Tuesday 17 of July 2012, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
> On 07/16/2012 06:53 PM, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
> > The most problematic ones are the gcc compiler used on Mac OS X (gcc
> > 4.0?), and MSVC 2008 compilers. If you (or someone else equally
> > interested) are willing to research those two compiler
On 07/16/2012 06:53 PM, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
The most problematic ones are the gcc compiler used on Mac OS X (gcc
4.0?), and MSVC 2008 compilers. If you (or someone else equally
interested) are willing to research those two compilers to see what
subset of C++11 features they support (if at all),
Thank you again.
Unfortunately gcc starts to support C++11 only in 4.3, and MSVC has very
little C++11 in 2008 (2010 has much more).
Uray M. János
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:35 PM, János Uray wrote:
> > Thank you.
> > It's not a happy answ
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:53:24PM -0400, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:35 PM, János Uray wrote:
> > Thank you.
> > It's not a happy answer though.
> > I hoped that there are at least some little features in the intersection of
> > the C++11-knowledge of the supported compilers
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:35 PM, János Uray wrote:
> Thank you.
> It's not a happy answer though.
> I hoped that there are at least some little features in the intersection of
> the C++11-knowledge of the supported compilers.
The most problematic ones are the gcc compiler used on Mac OS X (gcc
4
Forgot to reply all in this gmail web interface...
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:15 PM, János Uray wrote:
>> I have a simple question.
>> Can I use C++11 in LibreOffice development? Or at least some parts of C++11?
>
> The short answer is, no
24 matches
Mail list logo
