On Friday 10 September 2010 17:43:59 Adem wrote:
Sometime ago, there was a brief mention of multi-threading FPC would be
counter productive because compilation process was mostly disk IO bound
--this is what I understood anyway.
I wanted to check to see if disk IO was really limiting
On 11 Sep 2010, at 08:55, Martin Schreiber wrote:
Interesting is that Delphi 7 compiles about 10 times faster than FPC on the
same machine.
http://www.mail-archive.com/fpc-devel%40lists.freepascal.org/msg08029.html
Results with more code and FPC 2.4:
On Saturday, 11. September 2010 11.32:38 Jonas Maebe wrote:
So yes, FPC is slower than Delphi. Would parallelising FPC reduce the speed
gap?
Because the gap is so big I think not substantial.
Given that (please correct me if I am wrong):
- FPC bottleneck is disk IO and not compiler logic and
On Saturday 11 September 2010 09:55:14 Martin Schreiber wrote:
On Friday 10 September 2010 17:43:59 Adem wrote:
Sometime ago, there was a brief mention of multi-threading FPC would be
counter productive because compilation process was mostly disk IO bound
--this is what I understood anyway.
On 11 Sep 2010, at 12:23, Martin Schreiber wrote:
or it isn't true that FPC bottleneck is disk IO. Are we absolutely sure about
the bottleneck?
I'm quite certain that there are many reasons that FPC compiles more slowly
than Delphi. The bottlenecks probably also vary from platform to
On Saturday, 11. September 2010 12.25:14 Juha Manninen (gmail) wrote:
One would think Delphi and FPC need the same disk IO?
I read the threads. My guess is also that the slowness comes from searching
and writing many files in big directory structures. It is slow even if the
files are cached.
On Saturday 11 September 2010 13:40:26 Martin Schreiber wrote:
And why does the Delphi commandline compiler (dcc32) not need this IDE
assistance?
My guess is that dcc32 works as an integrated make program + compiler and thus
doesn't start external processes for each file.
Or, if it starts an
Jonas Maebe пишет:
On 11 Sep 2010, at 12:23, Martin Schreiber wrote:
or it isn't true that FPC bottleneck is disk IO. Are we absolutely sure about
the bottleneck?
I'm quite certain that there are many reasons that FPC compiles more slowly than Delphi.
The bottlenecks probably also vary from
On Sat, 11 Sep 2010, Juha Manninen (gmail) wrote:
On Saturday 11 September 2010 13:40:26 Martin Schreiber wrote:
And why does the Delphi commandline compiler (dcc32) not need this IDE
assistance?
My guess is that dcc32 works as an integrated make program + compiler and thus
doesn't start
On Sat, 11 Sep 2010, Sergei Gorelkin wrote:
Jonas Maebe пишет:
On 11 Sep 2010, at 12:23, Martin Schreiber wrote:
or it isn't true that FPC bottleneck is disk IO. Are we absolutely sure
about the bottleneck?
I'm quite certain that there are many reasons that FPC compiles more slowly
than
On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 16:02:52 +0200 (CEST)
Michael Van Canneyt mich...@freepascal.org wrote:
On Sat, 11 Sep 2010, Juha Manninen (gmail) wrote:
On Saturday 11 September 2010 13:40:26 Martin Schreiber wrote:
And why does the Delphi commandline compiler (dcc32) not need this IDE
Michael Van Canneyt пишет:
One idea that comes at this point is to put PPU data directly into
object files, so the number of output files is reduced plain twice.
The PPU data could be placed into a section that is ignored by linker.
However I don't know is this is possible for all
On 11 September 2010 16:12, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
Martin, can you give a comparison between win32 and Linux 32?
Add to that Martin, I know MSEgui is compilable with FPC and
Delphi. Is MSEgui compilable with Kylix 3 too? Then one could do a
Delphi 7 vs Kylix 3 comparison as well - seeing
On Saturday, 11. September 2010 18.37:49 Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 11 September 2010 16:12, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
Martin, can you give a comparison between win32 and Linux 32?
Add to that Martin, I know MSEgui is compilable with FPC and
Delphi. Is MSEgui compilable with Kylix 3 too?
On Saturday, 11. September 2010 16.12:10 Mattias Gaertner wrote:
Maybe dcc32 likes the MSEgui sources.
Or maybe FPC does not like MSEgui sources. ;-)
Martin, can you give a comparison between win32 and Linux 32?
I don't have a working Kylix 3 environment at the moment. IIRC dcc32 on Linux
Am 11.09.2010 19:50, schrieb Martin Schreiber:
On Saturday, 11. September 2010 16.12:10 Mattias Gaertner wrote:
Maybe dcc32 likes the MSEgui sources.
Or maybe FPC does not like MSEgui sources. ;-)
Martin, can you give a comparison between win32 and Linux 32?
I don't have a working Kylix
On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 19:50:41 +0200
Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, 11. September 2010 16.12:10 Mattias Gaertner wrote:
Maybe dcc32 likes the MSEgui sources.
Or maybe FPC does not like MSEgui sources. ;-)
Martin, can you give a comparison between win32 and Linux
On Saturday 11 September 2010 20:27:46 Florian Klämpfl wrote:
What machine? Because with hot disk cache, I just build MSEide in about
10 s (15 s cold) on W7 64 Bit:
The same as for all other tests,
win2000, AMD Athlon XP 3000+, 1GB RAM
...
Linking mseidefp.exe
308574 lines compiled, 10.6
Am 11.09.2010 20:50, schrieb Martin Schreiber:
On Saturday 11 September 2010 20:27:46 Florian Klämpfl wrote:
What machine? Because with hot disk cache, I just build MSEide in about
10 s (15 s cold) on W7 64 Bit:
The same as for all other tests,
win2000, AMD Athlon XP 3000+, 1GB RAM
...
Am 11.09.2010 22:04, schrieb Jonas Maebe:
On 11 Sep 2010, at 21:10, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
Anyways, before this ends in an endless discussion: if anybody is
interested in improving FPC compilation speed (for my needs is
sufficient) and have a look at fillchar and, have a look at FPC's
On 11 September 2010 21:10, Florian Klämpfl flor...@freepascal.org wrote:
FPC
---
Linking mseidefp.exe
308574 lines compiled, 10.6 sec , 2577952 bytes code, 1618920 bytes data
Delphi
-
mseide.pas(63)
280491 lines, 2.18 seconds, 2110568 bytes code, 752073 bytes data.
Now this
- Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.com schreef:
On Saturday, 11. September 2010 12.25:14 Juha Manninen (gmail) wrote:
One would think Delphi and FPC need the same disk IO?
I read the threads. My guess is also that the slowness comes from
searching
and writing many files in big
- Juha Manninen (gmail) juha.mannine...@gmail.com schreef:
On Saturday 11 September 2010 13:40:26 Martin Schreiber wrote:
And why does the Delphi commandline compiler (dcc32) not need this
IDE
assistance?
My guess is that dcc32 works as an integrated make program + compiler
and
- Michael Van Canneyt mich...@freepascal.org schreef:
On Sat, 11 Sep 2010, Juha Manninen (gmail) wrote:
On Saturday 11 September 2010 13:40:26 Martin Schreiber wrote:
And why does the Delphi commandline compiler (dcc32) not need this
IDE
assistance?
My guess is that dcc32 works
Hi!
Today I was thinking about fpc packages (whenever I am using this word,
I mean Delphi-style-DLL-packages) and what difficulties might arise when
implementing them. In my opinion, doing packages for D6-like Pascal
should not be conceptually hard. It'll be more of a technical challenge
to
- Florian Klämpfl flor...@freepascal.org schreef:
Am 11.09.2010 20:50, schrieb Martin Schreiber:
On Saturday 11 September 2010 20:27:46 Florian Klämpfl wrote:
What machine? Because with hot disk cache, I just build MSEide in
about
10 s (15 s cold) on W7 64 Bit:
The same as for
On Sunday, 12. September 2010 01.31:43 Dimitri Smits wrote:
And why does the Delphi commandline compiler (dcc32) not need this IDE
assistance?
it does. Delphi IDE passes extra assumptions/directories that the
commandline tool does not know about (for instance $(DELPHI)/Projects/Bpl).
On Saturday, 11. September 2010 21.10:20 Florian Klämpfl wrote:
Anyways, before this ends in an endless discussion: if anybody is
interested in improving FPC compilation speed (for my needs is
sufficient) and have a look at fillchar and, have a look at FPC's unit
loading algorithm (not the
28 matches
Mail list logo
