Date: 05 Jan 2003 14:27:46 -0800 From: swear@attbi.com (Gary W. Swearingen) To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Bystander shot by a spam filter Message-ID: <o73co7mdul.co7@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20030105125940.0293f4e0@localhost> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20030105120224.029377d0@localhost> <3E18073C.68182FE4@mindspring.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20030104201251.029387d0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20030104112015.026a5530@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20030104201251.029387d0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20030104202908.03c3b100@localhost> <20030105073804.GA72674@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20030105074923.GA4956@papagena.rockefeller.edu> <3E18073C.68182FE4@mindspring.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20030105120224.029377d0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20030105125940.0293f4e0@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> writes: > 20% of a 3 GHz machine is a lot of cycles. Roughy 20% of them. You'd have to sell a whole lot of compilers to balance the cost of a replacement compiler with the savings of 20% fewer computers that run the compilers, being especially hard since there are many fewer compilers than computers. Taking this to the free software world, 20% would hardly enough to merit tying up a team of gcc-replacement programmers, keeping them away from more useful (in general) projects they could effect in 100% sort of ways. There's evidence in the fact that nobody's found it worthwhile in the last decade, even when the percentage was much larger than 20%. -- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?o73co7mdul.co7>