Re: [Nmh-workers] GCC 8 pre-releases have escaped...

[Ralph Corderoy]

Hi Bakul,

> Refactoring, code cleanup and fixing memory leaks are worthy goals.
> But that can take lots of time and volunteers.

True, but GC would just be papering over some of those cracks.  :-)
Besides, without it the source will continue to suffer bit rot and
whatever the UI equivalent is when its orthogonality degrades.
Arguably, it wasn't up to having MIME added.

> > It works!  Well, simpler programs work.  scan(1) SEGVs, ditto
> > folder(1).  But I could play around a bit, comparing it to the
> > installed nmh-git 1.7+dev.r4298-1 in /bin.
>
> This is promising! Segfaults likely point to genuine bugs.

Yes, they're definitely there to be pointed at.  :-)

> >     $ inst() { perf stat -e instructions "$@" |&
> >     >     awk '/instructions:u/ {print $1}' | tr -d ,; }
>
> Presumably this counts actual instructions executed?

Yes, perf-stat(1) and perf-list(1).  It's the CPU's own count of
instructions.  Limiting `perf stat' to just that with -e ensures it's
accurate instead of sampled as stat otherwise tries to measure more
things than the local hardware may allow.

-- 
Cheers, Ralph.
https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy