Date: Tue, 19 Dec 1995 10:48:30 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@rocky.sri.MT.net> To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: nate@rocky.sri.MT.net (Nate Williams), questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: undump program Message-ID: <199512191748.KAA26848@rocky.sri.MT.net> In-Reply-To: <199512191738.KAA14704@phaeton.artisoft.com> References: <199512190401.VAA25491@rocky.sri.MT.net> <199512191738.KAA14704@phaeton.artisoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > Wrong that "there is no advantage" or wrong that "the resulting 'binary' > > > will run at the same speed? > > > > The resulting binary will run faster than a perl + script. The > > resulting binary need never run through the syntax checker and > > optimizer. > > It will start up faster. It will not execute faster. It is the same > core image... there is no difference between them at the point that > the dump() takes place. That is the whole point, right? So, if the program takes 10 seconds to run as a 'perl + script', and it takes 5 seconds if it's a 'dumped' program, does the dumped program run faster? Geeze Terry, even after people give you actual *facts* which point out that you're wrong you'll continue to argue the point using useless semantics. I refuse to continue this useless conversation in public. I've already proven you wrong, yet you'll continue to argue the point until you can be right about *something*. Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199512191748.KAA26848>