wpp

[Dimitrie O. Paun]

On December 8, 2002 06:01 pm, Patrik Stridvall wrote:
[it seems that there are resons to keep wpp, but since it's
 a slow evening, I will respond... :)]

> I personally have only tried piping every file parsed by
> winapi_check through "gcc -E" and it is was unbearably slow,
> so I removed the code. The parsing it itself can't possibly
> taken that extra time.

So how do you account for the fact that compiling a .c file
is fast? It certanily does a hell of a lot more than preprocessing.
Look:
[dimi at dimi server]$ time gcc -c -I../../wine.src/server -I. -I../../wine.src/include -I../include  -g -O2 -Wall -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2  -D__WINE__ -D_REENTRANT -o trace.o ../../wine.src/server/trace.c

real    0m5.276s
user    0m4.129s
sys     0m0.102s
[dimi at dimi server]$ time gcc -E -I../../wine.src/server -I. -I../../wine.src/include -I../include  -g -O2 -Wall -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2  -D__WINE__ -D_REENTRANT -o trace.o ../../wine.src/server/trace.c

real    0m0.538s
user    0m0.166s
sys     0m0.012s

In other words, preprocessing is like 10% of compilation, so
it can't be unbearably slow. Something else is wrong.

> The FSF claims that you forking and calling a GPL:ed executable
> is the same as linking with a GPL:ed library and calling
> functions in that library.

Do you have a reference to this? Never heard of something like
this before.

-- 
Dimi.