Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

LLVM Clang 14 Lands An "Amazing" Performance Optimization

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Alexmitter View Post
    The GPL does not just give freedom, it protects freedom for everyone, so that your code is a gift that keeps on giving.
    Yeah, you can think of it as limiting the freedom of immediate downstream contributors for the benefit of all those downstream of them. It's trading local restrictions for more freedom, globally.

    However, I think it's silly to moralize about open source licenses. They each have their benefits and drawbacks, and which appears best depends entirely on where you sit and what your goals are.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by LuukD View Post
      Coremark is the odd one out. Wonder what that is about.
      I think it's nearly impossible to implement a compiler optimization that delivers real gains without hurting at least a few benchmarks on at least a few platforms.

      It could be something like that Coremark was manually optimized in ways that it doesn't benefit from the optimization where it would help, but applying the optimization does create additional register pressure -> more spilling than before.

      Of course, that's just hypothetical. Obviously, any notable regressions should be studied to see if mitigations can be added for such cases.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by cl333r View Post

        What do you mean by "worse"? Legally? Financially? Choice wise not enough software?
        It was very unpopular at the time, back then (at least in America) proprietary software was seen as the go to, red hat was the exception that pushed things forward that the industry needed.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by coder View Post
          Yeah, you can think of it as limiting the freedom of immediate downstream contributors for the benefit of all those downstream of them. It's trading local restrictions for more freedom, globally.

          However, I think it's silly to moralize about open source licenses. They each have their benefits and drawbacks, and which appears best depends entirely on where you sit and what your goals are.
          Moralize model does make sense to work out why different choices are being made. If the downstream parties are not moral and will take open source work and proceeded to closed source it, monetise it and finally directly compete with the open source work so effect running it out of market a non copyleft license is not a good move. Yes companies willing todo the bad behavour generally is like disobey the basic old rule as well "Don't kill the goose that lays the gold egg" Yes the upstream open source project is normally the one laying the golden egg.

          One way copyleft is limiting freedom but in some areas of the market that limit freedom is very much like a general world laws of do not kill the project you are taking advantage of.

          If everyone in this world was 100% moral we would not need to punish people for murder. The reality is the world is morally imperfect.

          Lot of people who want to push the moral as the reason to use X license in the process forget we are living in a moral imperfect world. Depending on how morally imperfect the people you are dealing and your own moral standards with serous-ally alters your license choice.

          Comment

          Working...
          X