←back to thread

383 points hkalbasi | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.211s | source
Show context
bjourne ◴[] No.42817059[source]
What a coincidence. :) Just an hour ago I compared the performance of wild, mold, and (plain-old) ld on a C project I'm working on. 23 kloc and 172 files. Takes about 23.4 s of user time to compile with gcc+ld, 22.5 s with gcc+mold, and 21.8 s with gcc+wild. Which leads me to believe that link time shouldn't be that much of a problem for well-structured projects.
replies(4): >>42817070 #>>42817177 #>>42817186 #>>42817193 #
1. ndesaulniers ◴[] No.42817070[source]
How about ld.lld?