Re: [Monotone-devel] Current monotone disadvantages

[Dean Kusler]

Well, one of the main benefits of using Boost is how easy it makes 
porting Monotone to non-Unix platforms like Windows. In my book, that's 
worth a lot more than compilation speed or runtime speed. It's also 
probably an issue of trading runtime for programmer time.
Libraries could definately be playing a role in slower startup times, 
and C++ does take longer than plain C to compile. Also, Monotone and 
Boost use some pretty complex C++ templates, which uses up a fair amount 
of memory. Again, this is probably an issue of runtime vs. programmer 
time. I'm guessing that the use of cryptographic functions plays a role 
in the speed issue as well, but once again I think that the benefits 
outweight the slight speed penalty.

Dean

Somehow, I get to the end of this email and feel like I've said nothing 
at all useful...

Nico -telmich- Schottelius wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am currently comparing tla and monotone. There are imho some drawbacks in
> monotone:
>
> - tla has lesser dependencies (gcc+libc vs. libboost* from monotone)
> - tla is faster (type "tla help" vs. "monotone")
> --> perhaps this is a reason of loading libs?
> - tla builds much faster (perhaps c vs. c++ or gcc vs. g++ problem)
>
>
> Just some things I noted, perhaps someone has thoughts if and howto
> fix those things.
>
> Nico
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Monotone-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature