Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ncar!tank!mimsy!chris
From: chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: Getting the most for a process.
Message-ID: <20140@mimsy.UUCP>
Date: 12 Oct 89 18:39:31 GMT
References: <593@cogent.UUCP> <12034@cgl.ucsf.EDU> <40090@bu-cs.BU.EDU> <1029@crdos1.crd.ge.COM>
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742
Lines: 23

In article <1029@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM
(Wm E Davidsen Jr) writes:
>  The Encore version of make looks at an environment variable and
>determines how many copies of the ccompilers to start. On a machine with
>8 cpu's you get a blindingly fast make compared to doing the same thing
>(in serial) on a faster machine.

(Not if the serial machine is more than 8 times faster, or if there is
only one source file.)

Unfortunately, the Encore version of cc, which is apparently a Greenhills
C compiler, has all of its `phases' built in.  Thus, if you are compiling
a single file, you cannot preprocess on cpu 0, compile on cpu 1, and
assemble on cpu 2 all at the same time.

Given the standard edit/compile/debug cycle, this---combining
everything---seems to me to be a major mistake.  Well, not so major as
all that, perhaps, since most of the time is spent in the compilation
part, not in preprocessing or assembly.  Still, the potential was
there, and would return if Encore used gcc as their standard compiler.
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 7163)
Domain:	chris@cs.umd.edu	Path:	uunet!mimsy!chris