Sorry. I mean do not bother providing a gccgo variant of the go runtime. Stick with the official golang compiler at 1.11. I don't see the small speedup in init time as being enough to justify supporting two variants of go actions.
--dave Michele Sciabarra <[email protected]> wrote on 12/11/2018 10:37:56 AM: > From: Michele Sciabarra <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Date: 12/11/2018 10:38 AM > Subject: Re: I created a variant of the go runtime that is faster atinit time > > Sorry not sure what you mean. Do you suggest I apply the change to use > gccgo in the official runtime, even if it is stuck at go 1.10 (the > latest is go 1.11) or I drop the idea of providing another runtime that > is faster to initialize? Would not be better to release both a gccgo > 1.10 and a golang 1.11 instead so I leave the choice to users? The first > produces smaller binaries but it is a bit slower and it is stuck to go > 1.10, the second is faster but it is slower to initialize because the > executable is bigger.-- > Michele Sciabarra > [email protected] > > > > ----- Original message ----- > From: David P Grove <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: I created a variant of the go runtime that is faster at > init timeDate: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 10:17:51 -0500 > > Michele Sciabarra <[email protected]> wrote on 12/11/2018 > 07:23:14 AM:> > > Then I created a variant of the go runtime, using GccGo. GccGo is a > > Go compiler, updated to Go version 1.10, that compiles using the Gcc > > compiler infrastructure. As a result, it produces dynamically linked > > executables that are smaller than the binaries produced by the > > standard Go compiler. > > ... > > > > GccGo is a bit slower than Go (but it is still the second faster > > runtime) but it is now the faster at init time because the > > executable is around 50k (and zipped it is only 17k). > > > > I am unsure if replace GccGo in the official runtime or provide > > both. The fact that the executable is small so it leads to faster > > init time I think it is important, but the GccGo compiler it is a > > bit behind in term of language support. > > > > My advice is to stick with the official runtime. I think that is > betterfor end users. > > --dave >
