Thread overview | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
September 02, 2014 Some notes on performance | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
I was googling around for information on ninja, the build system used by the Chromium project, when I stumbled across this interesting article about how it was optimized for performance: http://aosabook.org/en/posa/ninja.html I also read these two from that site, the latter of which I think I skimmed once before: http://aosabook.org/en/gpsd.html http://aosabook.org/en/llvm.html There are a host of articles on a bunch of open source projects: http://aosabook.org/en/index.html I hadn't seen these articles mentioned here, thought some of you might like them too. |
September 02, 2014 Re: Some notes on performance | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Joakim | The first link says that Chrome is a *90* meg binary! Gawd damn. Either they write some really bloated code, or modern browsers require way too much shit to function.
On Tuesday, 2 September 2014 at 09:27:29 UTC, Joakim wrote:
> I was googling around for information on ninja, the build system used by the Chromium project, when I stumbled across this interesting article about how it was optimized for performance:
>
> http://aosabook.org/en/posa/ninja.html
>
|
September 02, 2014 Re: Some notes on performance | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to po | On Tuesday, 2 September 2014 at 10:23:58 UTC, po wrote:
> The first link says that Chrome is a *90* meg binary! Gawd damn. Either they write some really bloated code, or modern browsers require way too much shit to function.
You should see how big it gets when you build it with all the debug symbols included ;-)
|
September 02, 2014 Re: Some notes on performance | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to po Attachments: | On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 10:23:57 +0000
po via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
> The first link says that Chrome is a *90* meg binary! Gawd
> damn. Either they write some really bloated code, or modern
> browsers require way too much shit to function.
i believe that he means "non-stripped binary".
|
September 02, 2014 Re: Some notes on performance | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to po | On Tuesday, 2 September 2014 at 10:23:58 UTC, po wrote: > The first link says that Chrome is a *90* meg binary! Gawd damn. Either they write some really bloated code, or modern browsers require way too much shit to function. The latter. On Tuesday, 2 September 2014 at 10:34:05 UTC, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote: > i believe that he means "non-stripped binary". I think that might be stripped: Chrome is gigantic, about as big as the base install of an open-source unix like FreeBSD, ie kernel and userland. That's why people compare web browsers to OS's these days. ;) |
September 02, 2014 Re: Some notes on performance | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Joakim | On Tuesday, 2 September 2014 at 11:19:09 UTC, Joakim wrote: > On Tuesday, 2 September 2014 at 10:23:58 UTC, po wrote: >> The first link says that Chrome is a *90* meg binary! Gawd damn. Either they write some really bloated code, or modern browsers require way too much shit to function. > > The latter. > > On Tuesday, 2 September 2014 at 10:34:05 UTC, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote: >> i believe that he means "non-stripped binary". > > I think that might be stripped: Chrome is gigantic, about as big as the base install of an open-source unix like FreeBSD, ie kernel and userland. That's why people compare web browsers to OS's these days. ;) That reminded me, here's a navigable treemap of their binary from four years ago, made by the ninja guy, when it was "only" 28.5 MBs: http://neugierig.org/software/chromium/bloat/ His blog post from back then with a bit more info: http://neugierig.org/software/chromium/notes/2010/11/tree-maps.html |
September 02, 2014 Re: Some notes on performance | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to ketmar | On Tuesday, 2 September 2014 at 10:34:05 UTC, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> i believe that he means "non-stripped binary".
No, I don't think he does. With the debug symbols etc. in place, it gets much, much bigger. :-)
|
September 02, 2014 Re: Some notes on performance | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Joseph Rushton Wakeling | On Tuesday, 2 September 2014 at 11:36:36 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
> On Tuesday, 2 September 2014 at 10:34:05 UTC, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> i believe that he means "non-stripped binary".
>
> No, I don't think he does. With the debug symbols etc. in place, it gets much, much bigger. :-)
I'd usually be able to tell you exactly how much bigger, but 16GB apparently isn't enough memory for linking the damn thing.
Yes. Really.
-Wyatt
|
September 06, 2014 Re: Some notes on performance | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to po | Am Tue, 02 Sep 2014 10:23:57 +0000 schrieb "po" <yes@no.com>: > The first link says that Chrome is a *90* meg binary! Gawd > damn. Either they write some really bloated code, or modern > browsers require way too much shit to function. Hmm, my installation of Lynx is 1.6 MiB in size. But gfx and HTML 5 are kind of non-existent. -- Marco |
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation