Hi, On Mar 16, 2014, at 18:05, Chris Jones wrote:
> Well yes, of course. I was thinking as much as a test, to see if its the > optimisations that are the issue, as it is for me, than as a solution. In my > case i simply could not compile at all without -O0... without it, the memory > usage hit around 9GB before being killed by our nightly regression testing > framework. If your case is not so bad and you can get by, then fine.... > >> >> Anyway, on #calligra someone just claimed he got about 1200MB peak memory >> usage building gmic.cpp with Apple's clang-3.4 . If someone else can confirm >> that the issue is rather moot (meaning I can continue to use g++ for just >> this file on 10.6 ... ) >> _______________________________________________ I've just been testing this a bit on my 10.9.2 VM with the latest Xcode (5.1, clang 3.4svn) installed. That VM has only 2.5GB of RAM (which it sees as 4GB, curiously). Still, gmic.cpp compiles much better with clang++ on that set-up (haven't tested clang-mp-3.3) though g++ still uses less memory (1.2 vs 1.4GB real peak) and completes about twice as quick. However, things go downhill again with clang 3.5 (from MacPorts). I've seen a peak real mem. usage of 1.75GB, and it is now sitting at <10%CPU with around 200MB real memory, but with "red" memory pressure and 1.72GB total compressed memory. If you feel like filing reports against a current clang version, you might want to check the 3.5 version on your code... R. _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
