cpan, MakeMaker, CFLAGS (and CCFLAGS)

cpan, MakeMaker, CFLAGS (and CCFLAGS)

Post by Andre » Wed, 23 Nov 2005 03:05:38


>"Andrew" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > writes:
You mean, a backup of "Config.pm"?

And if I were to rebuild perl per se, would that cause any
incompatibilities? If so, which ones, and what is the workaround?
Rebuild all the additional modules I installed with cpan? (If, so, i
guess i'd have to go through my cpan cache/build and rebuild and
reinstall "by hand" everything? unless there's an easier way...)

thanks!

andrew
 
 
 

cpan, MakeMaker, CFLAGS (and CCFLAGS)

Post by Sherm Pend » Wed, 23 Nov 2005 03:50:14

"Andrew" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > writes:


Yes. If you want to undo any change(s) you've made to Config.pm, how useful
do you imagine it might be to have a backup of some other file? ;-)


I didn't say anything about rebuilding Perl...

sherm--

--
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://www.yqcomputer.com/
Hire me! My resume: http://www.yqcomputer.com/

 
 
 

cpan, MakeMaker, CFLAGS (and CCFLAGS)

Post by Andre » Wed, 23 Nov 2005 04:47:22

>>>> for my life i can't figure out where this is coming from.

I didn't mean to suggest that you did. Perhaps I jumbled too many
distinct things into one sentence. What I meant was:

And what if I rebuilt the perl interpreter? Would that avoid the
dangers you caution me about?

Next, if rebuilding Perl /is/ a sure solution, I'd have to rebuild the
"extra" modules, too, right? Or else there would be
incompatibilities(?)

andrew
 
 
 

cpan, MakeMaker, CFLAGS (and CCFLAGS)

Post by Sherm Pend » Wed, 23 Nov 2005 05:34:11

"Andrew" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > writes:


Well, yes, but it's absurd overkill for what you want to accomplish.

The dangers I'm talking about are things like accidentally deleting an
important option, such as "-lperl", which would result in modules not
building at all.

At any rate, I *highly* doubt that there's much to be gained by changing
the flags you mentioned: "-march=i386 -mtune=pentium4". Perl modules that
have C code are generally just very thin wrappers around external libraries,
and won't benefit much (if at all) from processor-specific tuning options
like that.

What exactly is it you're trying to accomplish by changing those flags,
anyway? If you're trying to speed things up, you're usually better off
looking at algorithmic improvements, not compiler options.

sherm--

--
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://www.yqcomputer.com/
Hire me! My resume: http://www.yqcomputer.com/
 
 
 

cpan, MakeMaker, CFLAGS (and CCFLAGS)

Post by Andre » Wed, 23 Nov 2005 23:17:02

>

Perhaps. Unless the affected code is heavily used, and you're due for a
perl upgrade anyway, and you don't have to do much _beyond_ compiling
perl (and perhaps recompiling the additional modules).


thanks.


Bingo! All that you've just said is relevant and to the point, filling
in the right gaps in my knowledge. Yes, the fact that I'm probably
dealing with thin C wrappers would remove the concern altogether. I
wasn't sure if there was something in P4-optimized code that could
choke/stall the P3 processor -- seems like i read this somewhere... or
maybe that depends on a particular optimization _level_ (i.e., -O2,
-O3, etc.)

andrew
 
 
 

cpan, MakeMaker, CFLAGS (and CCFLAGS)

Post by Sherm Pend » Thu, 24 Nov 2005 00:14:16

"Andrew" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > writes:


Thanks. It's a struggle at times... I have a tendency to digress. ;-)


You could still apply better tuning options to the wrapped libraries.

sherm--

--
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://www.yqcomputer.com/
Hire me! My resume: http://www.yqcomputer.com/