DIP1000 observation

[Richard (Rikki) Andrew Cattermole]

On 01/09/2024 8:45 AM, Adam Wilson wrote:
> On Wednesday, 28 August 2024 at 15:28:47 UTC, Nick Treleaven wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 27 August 2024 at 18:35:06 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>>> This analysis could have been done in compiler, transparently to the 
>>> user.
>>
>> No - it would slow down the compiler if inference was done everywhere. 
>> It could also cause link errors because attributes are part of the 
>> mangled symbol name.
> 
> Even though I know it's going to cause Atila to have a seizure, I'm 
> going to say it anyways. We need to stop caring about compiler speed so 
> much. If adding an entire second to the compile time can save a company 
> from a multi-billion dollar lawsuit, the company is going to to tell you 
> to shut-up and eat the extra second.
> 
> Compile time is a feature, but it is not, and cannot be, the most 
> important feature.
> 
> Sorry Atila, but it had to be said. :)

To follow up on this: specialized use cases like compiler as a daemon 
should not dictate how normal compilation should work.

If you need to turn off memory safety analysis (that can be handled by 
JIT using read barriers for example) to make stuff like compiler as a 
daemon work fast then that is ok.

This is not an either/or situation. You can have both.