From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] build: pull: Compile .scm files in one process.
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2015 22:06:43 +0100
Message-ID: <87611gdul8.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <87si4kxtge.fsf@T420.taylan>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41620)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1ZuRk9-0004Zn-TP
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Nov 2015 16:06:50 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1ZuRk6-0000C8-KR
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Nov 2015 16:06:49 -0500
In-Reply-To: <87si4kxtge.fsf@T420.taylan> ("Taylan Ulrich
	\=\?utf-8\?Q\?\=5C\=22Bay\=C4\=B1rl\=C4\=B1\=2FKammer\=5C\=22\=22's\?\=
	message of "Thu, 05 Nov 2015 18:10:57 +0100")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Taylan Ulrich =?utf-8?Q?=22Bay=C4=B1rl=C4=B1?=
	=?utf-8?Q?=2FKammer=22?= <taylanbayirli@gmail.com>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

taylanbayirli@gmail.com (Taylan Ulrich "Bay=C4=B1rl=C4=B1/Kammer") skribis:

> It used to take ~18 minutes on my machine, now less than 3.

Sounds compelling.  :-)

> From fd5d9bf77fd38fad354d66c31e57bc9bbc86481f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: =3D?UTF-8?q?Taylan=3D20Ulrich=3D20Bay=3DC4=3DB1rl=3DC4=3DB1/Kammer?=
=3D
>  <taylanbayirli@gmail.com>
> Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 16:21:48 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] build: pull: Compile .scm files in one process.
>
> * guix/build/pull.scm (call-with-process): Removed procedure.
> (report-build-progress): Removed procedure.
> (p-for-each): Removed procedure.
> (build-guix): Don't create subprocesses to compile the .scm files.

[...]

> -                        ;; Build guix/*.scm before gnu/*.scm to speed
> -                        ;; things up.
> -                        (sort (find-files out "\\.scm")
> -                              (let ((guix (string-append out "/guix"))
> -                                    (gnu  (string-append out "/gnu")))
> -                                (lambda (a b)
> -                                  (or (and (string-prefix? guix a)
> -                                           (string-prefix? gnu b))
> -                                      (string<? a b))))))))

This logic should be kept (with this version of the patch, it starts
compiling gnu.scm, which depends on many modules, so the progress report
stays at 0% for maybe 30s and then suddenly reaches 20%.)

> +    ;; Compile the .scm files.  Also load every compiled file after writ=
ing it
> +    ;; to work around <http://bugs.gnu.org/15602> (FIXME).
> +    (let* ((files (filter (cut string-suffix? ".scm" <>)
> +                          (find-files out "\\.scm")))
> +           (total (length files)))
> +      (let loop ((file (car files))
> +                 (files (cdr files))
> +                 (completed 0))
> +        (display #\cr log-port)
> +        (format log-port "compiling...\t~5,1f% of ~d files" ;FIXME: i18n
> +                (* 100. (/ completed total)) total)
> +        (force-output log-port)
> +        (let ((go (string-append (string-drop-right file 4)
> +                                 ".go")))
> +          (format debug-port "~%compiling '~a'...~%" file)
> +          (parameterize ((current-warning-port debug-port))
> +            (compile-file file
> +                          #:output-file go
> +                          #:opts
> +                          %auto-compilation-options)
> +            (load-compiled go)))

So this simple =E2=80=98load-compiled=E2=80=99 call addresses
<http://bugs.gnu.org/15602>, right?  This is where the comment and
explanation about this bug should go.

The =E2=80=98load-compiled=E2=80=99 code seems to be the only difference wi=
th 52af657a,
which was right before we noticed #15602 (which led to 178f77b2.)

Another stylistic issue: please use =E2=80=98match=E2=80=99 instead of the =
unnameable
primitives.  ;-)

Could you send an updated patch?

Thanks!

Ludo=E2=80=99.