Re: Should native compilation be enabled by default?

[Andrea Corallo <acorallo@gnu.org>]

Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> writes:

> Colin Baxter wrote:
>
>> My argument is against the notion that default native
>> compilation is a "no brainer". I suggest it's a "some
>> brainer". There are issues about what libgccjit flag to pass
>> when compiling, as was pointed out in the link, whether two
>> years old or not.
>
> The installation and compilation process must always be made
> as simple and unobtrusive as possible for the user, avoiding
> the overdose of messages.
>
> That is the one concern I can think of with native
> compilation.
>
> I configure like this,
>
>   --with-native-compilation=aot
>
> then installation takes a little longer but you don't get all
> the messages later on.

One gets messages only if a file being compiled has issues, BTW since
8e5baaddec2 we are by default way more selctive on what we report during
native compilation so I don't think this problem still exists.

> Since everything is are to be compiled anyway, I don't see why that
> has to be done little by little.  Better to just do it once and be
> done with it IMO.

Not everything needs to be compiled unless one needs to load everything.

  Andrea