Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Baby X is bor nagain
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 17:12:45 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <v5empd$1jndv$2@dont-email.me>
References: <v494f9$von8$1@dont-email.me> <v53i4s$33k73$2@dont-email.me>
 <v53lf7$34huc$1@dont-email.me> <v53vh6$368vf$1@dont-email.me>
 <v54se1$3bqsk$1@dont-email.me> <20240624160941.0000646a@yahoo.com>
 <v5bu5r$va3a$1@dont-email.me> <20240624181006.00003b94@yahoo.com>
 <v5c86d$11ac7$1@dont-email.me> <JEheO.108086$ED9b.74955@fx11.iad>
 <v5cblg$11q0j$1@dont-email.me> <gEieO.108089$ED9b.25598@fx11.iad>
 <20240625113616.000075e0@yahoo.com> <mUzeO.141609$Cqra.55051@fx10.iad>
 <v5elql$1jmii$1@dont-email.me> <m3BeO.24907$Gurd.16179@fx34.iad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 17:12:46 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="9cf53d04b66d1800440e1f149c520af4";
	logging-data="1695167"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+wlVm19wJeFKISCK5enjlV+b8POKICWKA="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.11.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:sGUWoaRY8cY9LmfKzni+3Mdz044=
In-Reply-To: <m3BeO.24907$Gurd.16179@fx34.iad>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 3281

On 25/06/2024 17:08, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>> On 25/06/2024 14:48, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> 
>>>> That's why in my original post in this sub-thread, in order to give
>>>> a feeling of the size of compiler's job I gave the size of text
>>>> segment rather than size of the elf.
>>>> The size of text segment is, of course, not a good measure of
>>>> compiler's job, esp. when we are trying to compare compile jobs for
>>>> different target architectures, but it is less bad than any alternative
>>>> measure [that is not too hard to gather] that I can think of.
>>>> If you can think about anything better, please tell us.
>>>
>>> Does the compiled code meet functional and performance  specifications?
>>>
>>> That's the only criteria that matters.  Size of the executable
>>> and compilation speed are basically irrelevent metrics in my
>>> experience.
>>
>> If apparently anything goes,
> 
> I never said that.
> 
>> and you don't care how slow a tool is or
> 
> I never said that.
> 
>> how big its output, how do you detect unnecessary bloat?
> 
> I don't write programs with unnecessary bloat.
> 
>>
>> How do you detect gratuitous use of machine resources?
> 
> I write code that doesn't gratuitously use machine resources.
> 

These answers apply to me tool.

>>
>> BTW since you and DB are both keen on products like Python,
> 
> I have never posted anything about python here, that I recall.
> 
> I use it very infrequently.
> 

I /do/ use Python.  I use it when it is an appropriate language to use, 
  which is very different circumstances from when I use C (or C++). 
Different tools for different tasks.