From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= Subject: Re: Speeding up =?utf-8?B?4oCcZ3VpeCBwdWxs4oCdOg==?= splitting modules Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2020 22:50:03 +0100 Message-ID: <87zhexd3ec.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87k1657i7j.fsf@elephly.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46380) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ipJDL-0001L4-VQ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2020 16:50:08 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87k1657i7j.fsf@elephly.net> (Ricardo Wurmus's message of "Sun, 05 Jan 2020 21:37:36 +0100") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Hello! Ricardo Wurmus skribis: > On the other hand: this would need to be an ongoing effort. Newly > introduced packages or even new features might create complex module > cycles. It sounds tedious to keep track of this and to enforce > boundaries. Yes, I think this is a dead end: glibc could well end up become on Haskell (hi, Pandoc!), and then the whole module split effort collapses. Ultimately, I think we need to look into optimizing the compiler. The profiling I did a while back=C2=B9 suggests pessimal behavior of some of the compiler phases when given large inputs. Ludo=E2=80=99. =C2=B9 https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2017-10/msg00035.html (I=E2=80=99ve been meaning to resume that investigation for a long time, = but I=E2=80=99d really need to do nothing but that for a couple of weeks=E2= =80=A6)