On 11/13/13 11:55, Eric Botcazou wrote:
Across 10 runs we came in right at 70 minutes with the usual ~20 second
variance. So it's slightly slower than the default languages right now.
That doesn't help the cycle time for developers which was the major
point for me.
Your results still look a little strange to me...
They were consistent across the 10 runs with a spread of just 20 seconds
out of over an hour.
The machine is an older quad core, so if you're building one something
with more cores and Ada + its runtime parallelizes better than java +
its runtime, then you'd probably see materially different results.
IMO we need a non-call-exception language in the default mix, whatever it is.
You're probably right. Which means we're not going to see any
improvement in build/test cycle times. Sigh.
jeff
