Steven Bosscher: [ Charset ISO-8859-1 converted... ] > On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 11:16 PM, Kaveh R. GHAZI <ghazi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, 20 Jun 2008, Diego Novillo wrote: > > > >> On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 16:56, Kaveh R. GHAZI <ghazi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> > That aside, our current policy already allows e.g. not testing java if > >> > your change is to a part of the compiler that can't possible affect it. > >> > >> I didn't make it completely clear, but my suggestion was mostly to > >> help us middle/back-end hackers. > >> Diego. > > > > Yeah, that's what worries me, all roads lead through the middle-end. :-) > > What is far more worrying to me, actually, is that libjava grows > bigger and bigger and bigger with every release, so that testing it > costs developers who care zilch about java (i.e. most people) get > penalized more and more with increased bootstrap and test times. > > In my latest timings, building and testing java takes close to two > thirds of the total bootstrap+test time with all default languages > enabled. That's a lot for a practically unused library and front end. > It is the limiting time factor for me, at least, when doing gcc > development. I might add that building gcj also consumes much more memory than building C or C++, so building java on platforms like Sparc-Solaris when the system has fewer than 1 GB of memory is simply not possible at this stage, only C and C++ builds are possible (until some of us manage to lay in some inexpensive memory). -- Ctalk Home Page: http://www.ctalklang.org
