Re: [Fwd: Re: execv bug???]
Re: [Fwd: Re: execv bug???]
- Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: execv bug???]
- From: Ryan McGann <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 20:52:49 -0800
Well, if performance really mattered, then multiple processes
wouldn't be used. Debating fork() versus vfork() is like debating
whether you can run faster with 10 or 20 pounds attached to your
ankles. Either way, you're going to run slower than the guy with no
weights attached to his ankles.
I'm calling the (default, system-supplied) assembler from the compiler
once per compiled source file. I think that is a perfectly normal use-
case and not an example of using the wrong tools/api's for the job
(afaik, the assembler does not support batch processing).
I'd say not considering that's how Xcode does things as well. And not
to rag on Xcode, but when compiling a C++ application with 500+ files
in it for 4 different architectures (ppc[64], x_86[64]), Xcode spawns
a couple (thousand) processes. So unless Xcode is going to be
rewritten so that it doesn't spawn gcc and ld, I'd say performance of
fork does matter :-)
Ryan
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden