Re: code bloat [was Re: Semaphore assembly-code bug]
From: Jan Engelhardt
Date: Sun Oct 31 2004 - 01:51:01 EST
>> Hmm probably some bloat-detection tools would be helpful,
>> like "show me source_lines/object_size ratios of fonctions in
>> this ELF object file". Those with low ratio are suspects of
>> excessive inlining etc.
Hm, I've got a (very simple) line determining utility,
http://linux01.org:2222/f/UHXT/bin/sourcefuncsize
maybe someone can pipe it together with ls -l or whatever.
>The problem with apps of this sort is the multiple layers of abstraction.
>
>Xlib, GLib, GTK, GNOME, Pango, XML, etc.
At least they know one thing: that thou should not stuff everything into one
.so but multiple ones (if it's a lot). That /may/ reduce the size-in-memory,
because not all .so's need to be loaded. OTOH, most apps load /all/ anyway.
Heh, there we go.
>Bloat is cause by feature creep at every layer, not just the app.
I sense Java and C# being the best example.
Z Smith wrote:
>Or join me in my effort to limit bloat. Why use an X server
>that uses 15-30 megs of RAM when you can use FBUI which is 25 kilobytes
>of code with very minimal kmallocing?
FBUI does not have 3d acceleration?
Ken Moffat wrote:
>>The point is that -Os is *much* less tested
>>than -O2 at the moment.
>Because people suck, and don't use it and hence test it.
I doubt even the -O2-only-people use gprof/gcov frequently. :(
Jan Engelhardt
--
Gesellschaft fÃr Wissenschaftliche Datenverarbeitung
Am Fassberg, 37077 GÃttingen, www.gwdg.de
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/