On 2024-04-21 15:38, Bruno Haible wrote:
Hi Paul,
But the concepts of the shell are stuck in the 40-years-ago past.
True, but keeping things simple allows for optimizations like PaSH that
can't reasonably be done to Python.
https://binpa.sh/
Well, I did try PaSh on gnulib-tool — this issue [1] is a testimony.
I agree that PaSh is not ready to tackle 'configure' scripts yet.
However, it's promising and I wouldn't expect similar promise from
Python script acceleration.
A better way to exploit PaSh would be to modify Autoconf to use it
effectively. This of course would be nontrivial, though it shouldn't be
*that* hard.
But what can you expect from a parallelization approach? On, say, a
quad-core processor you can expect at most a 4x speedup.
Quad-core is not the wave of the future. Even the three-year-old (and
now discontinued) Xeon W-1350 I'm typing this on (which was trailing
edge and bottom of the line when it came out - hey, I'm a cheapskate!)
is 6 cores and 12 threads. And if you've been following recent CPU news
you're aware of the big core counts coming down the pipeline. We should
be engineering for these future systems, and not worry too much about
yesterday's quad-core CPUs.
And if one can't get a decent single node to develop on, there's always
DiSh on the horizon....
https://github.com/binpash/dish
