C++11 in LibreOffice
kohei.yoshida at gmail.com
Thu Jul 19 06:59:40 PDT 2012
On 07/19/2012 09:49 AM, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 08:59:34AM -0400, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 7:45 AM, Michael Stahl <mstahl at redhat.com> wrote:
>>> i don't believe an office suite will benefit all that much from
>>> sophisticated compiler optimizations;
>> It's certainly your opinion. But I tend think that, any binary
>> generated from a compiler could use the benefit of compiler
>> optimization. I find it hard to believe that somehow an "office suite"
>> category is an exception. But maybe it's just me.
> I think Michael was suggesting that our prouct is IO-bound and not that
> CPU-bound anyway. While that isnt completely the case for the area you work on
> it is a valid assumption for the product as a whole.
Understood. What I was trying to say was that this is not a "either-or"
problem. Since compiler optimization is free (free in the sense that
all we have to do is turn it on) and can be done in parallel with our
effort to improve algorithms, there is no reason why we should focus on
one and ignore the other.
Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc
More information about the LibreOffice