Search
Tuesday, 11th of February 2020, 20:41:01 UTC
20:41:23
stassats
make-target-2.sh wouldn't have anything to run
20:42:08
stassats
the host sbcl is compiled with speed 3, safety 0, without threads
20:43:57
stassats
and without sb-unicode
20:44:44
stassats
but that's not worth a lot
20:45:25
stassats
(but is for me, when i have to redo all the time and every second counts)
20:48:03
flip214
I understand what you're getting at! For me, recompiling twice a week, that's not a real difference, but for you it is
20:48:58
stassats
i have compiled more times since my last message
20:49:12
flip214
201.33user 25.47system 1:27.79elapsed
20:51:23
flip214
parallel QL or ASDF would still be very nice
20:51:59
dlowe
ITA made a parallel ASDF called pcvb and it was fairly complicated.
20:52:36
dlowe
I can't keep them straight anymore
20:52:52
dlowe
piou is the parallel one, I think. xcvb is the asdf replacement that didn't take off
20:52:53
flip214
but parallel QL should be much easier
20:53:50
stassats
trying the latest sbcl as a build host, let's see what the recent compiler changes bring
20:54:01
stassats
(expecting a slow down / no change)
20:54:35
stassats
right, just some measurement noise
20:57:09
stassats
but my laptop fast-sbcl had sb-thread enabled, without it goes 2m13.440s => 1m51.990s
20:57:19
stassats
also with sb-fasteval for parallel make-host-1
20:59:35
stassats
except make-host-1 is no different, parallel or not
22:15:09
karlosz
wow, sb-thread really adds that much time?
22:15:23
karlosz
i didn't expect threading to affect build time that much
22:15:37
karlosz
sb-unicode i understand because there's a lot of unicode data to slurp
22:15:50
karlosz
but just having slower specials access seems like a lot
22:15:56
stassats
and it's a newer checkout
22:16:00
stassats
so, not validated results
22:17:00
stassats
it all may be due to sb-fasteval
6:50:35
White_Flame
in interrupt-thread's docstring, it talks about the interrupt code causing a non-local tranfers of control/unwind, which can skip in-progress ones from the interrupted code. Is it specifically talking about an unwind that leaves the interrupt's scope, or does it also include unwinds internal to the interrupt code?
6:51:55
White_Flame
meaning, as long as non-local transfers triggered in the interrupt handlder are fully handled within it and don't unwind back into the interrupted code, are the handlers safe from that particular problem?
Wednesday, 12th of February 2020, 8:41:01 UTC