🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <STEPHEN.90Sep30235402@estragon.uchicago.edu> stephen@estragon.uchicago.edu (Stephen P Spackman) writes:

>We already trust the compiler to do much of our optimisation. Making
>that compiler smarter, possibly interactively, is what we want to do
>next.

I definitely agree with you that the solution to this problem is to
make our compilers smarter.  However, I'm not quite sure that making
them interactive is going to help.

It assumes that the person who is compiling (and this person is not
necessarily the author) a given program knows what is more optimal.
I doubt that the majority of people who compile or build software have
the time to learn the code and machine architectures well enough to
make informed decisions about optimisations.  Also, interactive
compiling would probably take 5-10 times longer than batch compiling
(just a guess; if someone knows of some real research done in this
area, please post the results), and requires that someone devote a lot
of time to a relatively boring job.

Just some thoughts,
-- 
	NEVIN ":-)" LIBER
	nevin@igloo.scum.com  or  ..!gargoyle!igloo!nevin
	(708) 831-FLYS
California, here I come!	Public Service Announcement: Say NO to Rugs!