[llvm-dev] LLD status update and performance chart

[Philip Reames via llvm-dev]

On 12/13/2016 12:22 PM, Rafael Avila de Espindola via llvm-dev wrote:
> David Chisnall via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes:
>
>> On 13 Dec 2016, at 19:02, Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>> I’m totally willing to believe you that it is not possible to write the fastest ELF linker on earth (or in the universe) with a library based and reusable components approach. But clang is not the fastest C/C++ compiler available, and LLVM is not the fastest compiler framework either!
>> I’m not how it compares now, but at least when I started contributing and for a year or two after the speed of clang (especially at O0, for fast compile-test-debug cycles) was one of its big selling points.
> It is pretty horrible actually. Last I measure (March) clang was slower
> than gcc at building llvm+clang. The subject is "llvm and clang are
> getting slower" if you want to search for the details.
>
> Another reason for having lld "done" and benchmarked first.
Can you define "done"?  This is a serious question; I am not trolling 
here.  I can understand your desire to finish one effort first, but if 
you're going to put off other work until it is "done", you need to 
clearly define what that means.
>
> Cheers,
> Rafael
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev