On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 12:08:52PM -0400, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
>> On 2014-06-03, 5:57 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> >On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 5:45 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
>> >>Assuming that ICU is already compiled with the moral equivalent of
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 12:08:52PM -0400, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
> On 2014-06-03, 5:57 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> >On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 5:45 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> >>Assuming that ICU is already compiled with the moral equivalent of GCC's
> >>-ffunction-sections -fdata-sections or MSVC's /Gy,
On 2014-06-03, 5:57 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 5:45 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
Assuming that ICU is already compiled with the moral equivalent of GCC's
-ffunction-sections -fdata-sections or MSVC's /Gy, then statically linking ICU
into libxul should already strip out all th
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 5:45 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> Assuming that ICU is already compiled with the moral equivalent of GCC's
> -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections or MSVC's /Gy, then statically linking
> ICU into libxul should already strip out all the un-needed ICU bits (when
> using the ap
- Original Message -
> Is there a way to give the linker a list of functions that you want to have
> as public entry points of a dynamically linked library, and have it strip
> out everything that can’t be reached from these functions? That’s
> essentially what happens when you statically l
> > This is at least in part due to bug 915735, you can go and read the bug to
> > see that I did the best I could there, given the constraints that I had
> > (not understanding how the magic of the interaction of ICU and our build
> > system worked, not understanding which parts of ICU we actua
Sorry, I only now discovered this thread. Below are replies to many of the
issues raised with regards to the work I did adding ICU and the ECMAScript
Internationalization API early last year.
A lot of background information is in this document (no longer fully up to
date):
http://lindenbergsoft
On 04/28/2014 05:59 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> Hopefully we didn't remove collation rules, since that's the part we
> are supposed to be using ICU for! :-)
I'm uncertain exactly what the terminology means necessarily for us, but
intl/icu-patches/genrb-omitCollationRules.diff exists because a flag
On 2014-04-29, 4:46 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
On 2014-04-28, 10:17 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Ehsan Akhgari
wrote:
On 2014-04-28, 8:59 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
New question:
We have various scriptable nsI
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
> On 2014-04-28, 10:17 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Ehsan Akhgari
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2014-04-28, 8:59 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
New question:
We have various scriptable nsIFoo stuff (e.g. nsIP
On 2014-04-28, 10:17 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
On 2014-04-28, 8:59 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
New question:
We have various scriptable nsIFoo stuff (e.g. nsIParserService,
nsIScriptableUConv) on the fringes of Gecko for use by mailnews, the
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
> On 2014-04-28, 8:59 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>>
>> New question:
>>
>> We have various scriptable nsIFoo stuff (e.g. nsIParserService,
>> nsIScriptableUConv) on the fringes of Gecko for use by mailnews, the
>> Firefox UI or extensions. Since
On 2014-04-28, 8:59 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
New question:
We have various scriptable nsIFoo stuff (e.g. nsIParserService,
nsIScriptableUConv) on the fringes of Gecko for use by mailnews, the
Firefox UI or extensions. Since Gaia doesn't use XPCOM, those things
are dead code in B2G, right? Would
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 5:42 PM, Mike Hoye wrote:
> On 2014-04-25, 3:31 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Benoit Jacob
>> wrote:
* How should we identify code that we build but that isn't used
anywhere?
>>>
>>> I'm afraid we need humans for that.
>>
>> Yeah
On 04/25/2014 02:10 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> "Different" means "old", right? Having an old version is a correctness
> problem, if the CLDR has changed since.
Depends what's considered "correctness". The ECMA Internationalization API
doesn't specify behavior, so older just means not-as-good, no
On 04/24/2014 05:49 AM, Till Schneidereit wrote:
> Questions:
> * Are we building and shipping dead code in ICU on B2G?
>
> I don't know the state of ICU on B2G, but if we have it enabled there, then
> almost certainly, yes.
There's doubtless *some* dead code in the ICU we build, yes.
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 04:15:45PM -0700, Brian Smith wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Ehsan Akhgari >wrote:
> >
> > > * Are there obvious places that people should inspect for code that's
> > >
> > >> being built but not used? S
On 2014-04-25, 3:31 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
* Are we building and shipping dead code in ICU on B2G?
No. That is at least partly covered by bug 864843.
Using system ICU seems wrong in terms of correctness. That's the
reason why we don't
On 2014-04-25, 11:12 AM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:42:43AM -0400, Mike Hoye wrote:
If we ask a thousand people to run a nightly under a profiler for a few days
and aggregated the results, would that be valuable information?
If the users are a good distribution and we col
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:42:43AM -0400, Mike Hoye wrote:
> On 2014-04-25, 3:31 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> >On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Benoit Jacob
> >wrote:
> >>> * How should we identify code that we build but that isn't used
> >>>anywhere?
> >>I'm afraid we need humans for that.
> >Ye
On 2014-04-25, 3:31 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Benoit Jacob wrote:
* How should we identify code that we build but that isn't used
anywhere?
I'm afraid we need humans for that.
Yeah, but how do we get humans to do that?
We ask them! There are thousands of pe
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 12:10:24PM +0300, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 11:26 AM, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:31:44AM +0300, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> >> Using system ICU seems wrong in terms of correctness. That's the
> >> reason why we don't use system ICU on
2014-04-25 3:31 GMT-04:00 Henri Sivonen :
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Benoit Jacob
> wrote:
> > 2014-04-24 8:31 GMT-04:00 Henri Sivonen :
> >
> >> I have prepared a queue of patches that removes Netscape-era (circa
> >> 1999) internationalization code that efforts to implement the Encoding
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 11:26 AM, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:31:44AM +0300, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> Using system ICU seems wrong in terms of correctness. That's the
>> reason why we don't use system ICU on Mac and desktop Linux, right?
>
> Actually the main reason is that ever
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> Therefore, it looks like we should turn off (if we haven't already):
> * The ICU LayoutEngine.
I don't find this code in the tree at all.
> * Ustdio
I don't yet know what we are doing about this one.
> * ICU encoding converters and th
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:31:44AM +0300, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> Using system ICU seems wrong in terms of correctness. That's the
> reason why we don't use system ICU on Mac and desktop Linux, right?
Actually the main reason is that every version of desktop linux has a
different version of ICU, wh
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> So it looks like we already build with UCONFIG_NO_LEGACY_CONVERSION:
> http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/intl/icu/source/common/unicode/uconfig.h#264
Oops. No. I misread.
--
Henri Sivonen
hsivo...@hsivonen.fi
https://hsivonen.
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Benoit Jacob wrote:
> 2014-04-24 8:31 GMT-04:00 Henri Sivonen :
>
>> I have prepared a queue of patches that removes Netscape-era (circa
>> 1999) internationalization code that efforts to implement the Encoding
>> Standard have shown unnecessary to have in Firefox.
On 2014-04-24, at 05:31, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> * Are there obvious places that people should inspect for code that's
> being built but not used? Some libs that got imported for WebRTC
> maybe?
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1001114
I’m told that sipcc is 3M stripped. We certainl
On 2014-04-24, 7:24 PM, Mike Hommey wrote:
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 07:03:09PM -0400, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
On 2014-04-24, 8:31 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
However, especially in the context of slimming down our own set of
encoding converters, it's rather demotivating to see that at least on
desktop
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 07:03:09PM -0400, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
> On 2014-04-24, 8:31 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> >However, especially in the context of slimming down our own set of
> >encoding converters, it's rather demotivating to see that at least on
> >desktop, we are building ICU encoding conve
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 04:15:45PM -0700, Brian Smith wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
>
> > * Are there obvious places that people should inspect for code that's
> >
> >> being built but not used? Some libs that got imported for WebRTC
> >> maybe?
> >>
> >
> > Noth
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
> * Are there obvious places that people should inspect for code that's
>
>> being built but not used? Some libs that got imported for WebRTC
>> maybe?
>>
>
> Nothing big comes to my mind. Perhaps hunspell on b2g?
>
https://bugzilla.mozilla
On 2014-04-24, 8:31 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
However, especially in the context of slimming down our own set of
encoding converters, it's rather demotivating to see that at least on
desktop, we are building ICU encoding converters that we don't use.
See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?i
(2014/04/24 21:49), Till Schneidereit wrote:
(CC'ing people who have worked on the ICU integration)
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 2:31 PM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
However, especially in the context of slimming down our own set of
encoding converters, it's rather demotivating to see that at least on
de
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 11:01:00AM -0400, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 09:20:06AM -0400, Benoit Jacob wrote:
> > 2014-04-24 8:31 GMT-04:00 Henri Sivonen :
> > > I have prepared a queue of patches that removes Netscape-era (circa
> > > 1999) internationalization code that efforts
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 09:20:06AM -0400, Benoit Jacob wrote:
> 2014-04-24 8:31 GMT-04:00 Henri Sivonen :
>
> > I have prepared a queue of patches that removes Netscape-era (circa
> > 1999) internationalization code that efforts to implement the Encoding
> > Standard have shown unnecessary to have
On 4/24/2014 9:20 AM, Benoit Jacob wrote:
2014-04-24 8:31 GMT-04:00 Henri Sivonen :
I have prepared a queue of patches that removes Netscape-era (circa
1999) internationalization code that efforts to implement the Encoding
Standard have shown unnecessary to have in Firefox. This makes libxul
on
2014-04-24 8:31 GMT-04:00 Henri Sivonen :
> I have prepared a queue of patches that removes Netscape-era (circa
> 1999) internationalization code that efforts to implement the Encoding
> Standard have shown unnecessary to have in Firefox. This makes libxul
> on ARMv7 smaller by 181 KB, so that's a
(CC'ing people who have worked on the ICU integration)
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 2:31 PM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> However, especially in the context of slimming down our own set of
> encoding converters, it's rather demotivating to see that at least on
> desktop, we are building ICU encoding conver
40 matches
Mail list logo
