* removed the bits about the backend compiler which no one maintains anymore
* explicity say that sfio may outperform stdio, since perl now has perlio * added stronger wording to comments on undump to show how really old it is. Index: perlfaq3.pod =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/public/perlfaq/perlfaq3.pod,v retrieving revision 1.32 diff -u -d -r1.32 perlfaq3.pod --- perlfaq3.pod 26 Jan 2003 17:41:53 -0000 1.32 +++ perlfaq3.pod 26 Jan 2003 18:49:03 -0000 @@ -482,13 +482,6 @@ modules that have critical sections can be written in C (for instance, the PDL module from CPAN). -In some cases, it may be worth it to use the backend compiler to -produce byte code (saving compilation time) or compile into C, which -will certainly save compilation time and sometimes a small amount (but -not much) execution time. See the question about compiling your Perl -programs for more on the compiler--the wins aren't as obvious as you'd -hope. - If you're currently linking your perl executable to a shared I<libc.so>, you can often gain a 10-25% performance benefit by rebuilding it to link with a static libc.a instead. This will make a bigger perl @@ -497,11 +490,11 @@ information. Unsubstantiated reports allege that Perl interpreters that use sfio -outperform those that don't (for I/O intensive applications). To try +outperform those that use stdio (for I/O intensive applications). To try this, see the F<INSTALL> file in the source distribution, especially the ``Selecting File I/O mechanisms'' section. -The undump program was an old attempt to speed up your Perl program +The undump program was an ancient attempt to speed up Perl program by storing the already-compiled form to disk. This is no longer a viable option, as it only worked on a few architectures, and wasn't a good solution anyway. -- brian d foy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
