Re: [racket-dev] SGC as default

2014-08-12 Thread Matthew Flatt
Apparently, when gcc 4.9.1 sees memcpy(x, y, n); if (y) then it believes `y` can be assumed to be NULL --- even if `n` turns out to be zero --- and so the conditional can be optimized away. I'm surprised by that rule, but it's easy enough to move the test before the memcpy(). At Tue,

Re: [racket-dev] SGC as default

2014-08-12 Thread Matthew Flatt
The gcc 4.9 release notes warn about this optimization: https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.9/porting_to.html I'm surprised that this change hasn't caused more trouble for us. At Tue, 12 Aug 2014 08:39:01 +0100, Matthew Flatt wrote: Apparently, when gcc 4.9.1 sees memcpy(x, y, n); if (y)

Re: [racket-dev] SGC as default

2014-08-12 Thread Sam Tobin-Hochstadt
How difficult would it be to allow the bootstrap process to use a preexisting Racket installation? This would alleviate some of the performance loss, for example in rebuilds by developers or in continuous integration. Sam On Aug 11, 2014 11:16 PM, Matthew Flatt mfl...@cs.utah.edu wrote: I've

Re: [racket-dev] [racket] Performance. Higher-order function

2014-08-12 Thread Vincent St-Amour
Ok, let's try to do that. Is there currently a way to include packages from 3rd party repos to the main distribution? Vincent At Tue, 12 Aug 2014 00:03:04 -0400, Greg Hendershott wrote: Being in the main repo is different from being in the distribution (and thus automatically installed).

Re: [racket-dev] [racket] Performance. Higher-order function

2014-08-12 Thread Robby Findler
I think you'd have to add a dependency to the 'main-distribution' pkg, but my guess is that that will require some work internally to make not be a pain for people who want to build from git. If you have the inclination, you could give it a try locally and let us know how it goes? Robby On Tue,

Re: [racket-dev] SGC as default

2014-08-12 Thread Matthew Flatt
I'm not sure how difficult it will be. It's tedious enough that the last time I thought about it, I just left a note next to no-cgc-needed in racket/src/racket/Makefile.in, but maybe it's worth pursuing now. At Tue, 12 Aug 2014 04:39:55 -0700, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: How difficult would it be

Re: [racket-dev] [racket] Performance. Higher-order function

2014-08-12 Thread Leif Andersen
but my guess is that that will require some work internally to make not be a pain for people who want to build from git Wouldn't this be the ideal case for git submodules? ~Leif Andersen On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Robby Findler ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu wrote: I think you'd have to

Re: [racket-dev] [racket] Performance. Higher-order function

2014-08-12 Thread Matthew Flatt
We discussed the possibility git submodules last year, and I think the consensus was that it wouldn't work well. We did attach the native-library repo (for Mac OS X and Windows) as a submodule to the main Racket repo, and that worked well enough, but I think it has worked only because the