From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: f4337,97c1afaa2414b3e2
X-Google-Attributes: gidf4337,public
X-Google-Thread: 11307a,f7d969d93769b1bb
X-Google-Attributes: gid11307a,public
X-Google-Thread: fecf8,f7d969d93769b1bb
X-Google-Attributes: gidfecf8,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,f7d969d93769b1bb
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Ada for OS/2 (was Re: Linux faster than OS/2...)
Date: 1997/07/05
Message-ID: <dewar.868154088@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 254900627
References: <5ovqj1$4ul$1@unlisys.unlisys.net>
 <5p06jo$c1r$2@elektron.et.tudelft.nl> <5p38a7$2df$2@unlisys.unlisys.net>
 <5p93ov$9ro@news.mr.net> <5p9tpm$e90$1@unlisys.unlisys.net>
 <5pbea3$a0v@corn.cso.niu.edu> <5peljs$i2p$1@gonzo.sun3.iaf.nl>
 <c1.01.2GjPcr$02M@zesi.ruhr.de> <33BEBF5C.367F@berlin.snafu.de>
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: 
 comp.os.os2.setup.misc,comp.os.os2.programmer.misc,comp.os.os2.programmer.oop,comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-07-05T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Michael said

<<I have done this today. It seems now to work a bit faster.>>

That's not very convincing :-)
Did you actually measure the difference.
I tried the -pipe and it made no difference at all to the 
compilation speed of several examples I tried.

But a lot depends on your setup. In my setup, I have 80 megs and never
swap, so in fact disk IO is completely overlapped (I tried an interesting
experiment which was to put

sources, objects, temp files, ali files

for the library all in a RAM disk, and compile the library. It took, 
within measurable accuracy EXACTLY the same time as using a disk with
the normal HPFS cache.

That's why I don't think -pipe will help. If you have a decent amount
of RAM and a 2 meg cache, then the temporary files get written to the
cache, and read from the cache. Sure, they get written to disk as well,
but these are lazy writes from the cache which can be completely
overlapped with computation.