Received: from PACIFIC-CARRIER-ANNEX.MIT.EDU by po7.MIT.EDU (5.61/4.7) id AA28704; Tue, 19 Dec 95 16:11:35 EST
Received: from halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu by MIT.EDU with SMTP
	id AA26422; Tue, 19 Dec 95 16:11:35 EST
Received: from freefall.FreeBSD.ORG by halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu; (5.65/1.1.8.2/19Aug95-0530PM)
	id AA13028; Tue, 19 Dec 1995 16:11:25 -0500
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA25622
          Tue, 19 Dec 1995 10:03:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id KAA25587
          for questions-outgoing; Tue, 19 Dec 1995 10:03:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA25581
          for <questions@FreeBSD.ORG>; Tue, 19 Dec 1995 10:03:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id KAA14801; Tue, 19 Dec 1995 10:58:09 -0700
From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Message-Id: <199512191758.KAA14801@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Subject: Re: undump program
To: nate@rocky.sri.MT.net (Nate Williams)
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 1995 10:58:09 -0700 (MST)
Cc: terry@lambert.org, nate@rocky.sri.MT.net, questions@FreeBSD.ORG
In-Reply-To: <199512191748.KAA26848@rocky.sri.MT.net> from "Nate Williams" at Dec 19, 95 10:48:30 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk

> > It will start up faster.  It will not execute faster.  It is the same
> > core image... there is no difference between them at the point that
> > the dump() takes place.  That is the whole point, right?
> 
> So, if the program takes 10 seconds to run as a 'perl + script', and it
> takes 5 seconds if it's a 'dumped' program, does the dumped program run
> faster?

Does your machine detect that it's an undumped program and initiate
"turbo mode" automatically?  If not, the answer is "no", it doesn't
run faster.

It *loads* faster.  The *wall time* is shorter.  It *runs* the same
speed.  For perl programs, loading is typically an insignificant part
of the total run time.

> Geeze Terry, even after people give you actual *facts* which point out
> that you're wrong you'll continue to argue the point using useless
> semantics.

And Forth programs run faster than assembly language... pull the
other one.

> I refuse to continue this useless conversation in public.  I've already
> proven you wrong, yet you'll continue to argue the point until you can
> be right about *something*.

How about this one: undump is an utterly bogus way of solving a problem
that someone is too lazy to solve another way.

I have no problem with selective laziness.  I *do* have a problem with
people rationalizing their laziness with bogus semantic arguments that
what they are doing is "not really what they are doing because..."


In any case, you will have to wait 12 days to pick up this argument
where you left off, since I am going to be vacationing.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.
