Eric Blake wrote: > According to Paolo Bonzini on 11/1/2008 11:54 AM: >> I must say I don't like it much, unless it gives a net improvement of at >> least 2-3% on coreutils, say. But I disagree on the math: doesn't it >> save only one cat *but also* one rm? > > It takes two cat's per AC_LANG_CONFTEST to build conftest.$ac_ext, so by > building it once instead of twice we save two processes. But each > AC_COMPILE_IFELSE does an rm of all built files, and if AC_LANG_CONFTEST > was not run, we must add an extra 'rm -f conftest.$ac_ext' after the > compile test, explaining the added rm.
Right, I was still thinking in terms of my first functionization patches. By a completely different approach, would it make sense to switch from cat to AS_ECHO in order to build the conftest.c files? That would save forks for *all* tests... Paolo
