Kyrylo Tkachov <[email protected]> writes:

>> On 4 Aug 2026, at 20:34, Jeffrey Law <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 8/4/2026 10:59 AM, Tamar Christina wrote:
>>> So I've been ignoring this since it's mostly Richard's thing and we seem to 
>>> disagree
>>> on design a lot.
>>> 
>>> But in my opinion we don't want to keep adding split code to every gen* 
>>> file individually
>>> but concentrate that code in gensupport so ever gen* can use it.
>> I think that's a fair concern.  We should have enough data on how to
>> split the gen* things derived from .md files to be able to see the
>> commonality as well as behaviorial differences we need to put in
>> place.  So it's probably a good time to look at that refactoring.  I
>> don't think anyone believes things are anywhere near optimal, but I
>> know for the ones Robin did last year, the affect was measured in
>> hours of wall clock time on RISC-V, so huge wins without even trying
>> too hard to be "optimal".
>
> Thanks for the background Tamar. I remember there was some activity in
> that area, but I had not done the homework tbh. I have a bit of time
> to dedicate in this area at the moment so I’ll see if I can come up
> with a sensible refactoring along these lines.
> I’ll hold off on committing these two patches for now, unless you want them 
> in in the meantime.

Personally, I'd like to see them in if others are OK with it, because I
have some backports for older branches that I use for convenience when
bisecting, and something more incremental is easier to use there too.

But this isn't very important if people prefer to wait.

>
> Kyrill
>
>> 
>> Jeff

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to