←back to thread

383 points hkalbasi | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.611s | source
Show context
ajb ◴[] No.42816737[source]
2008: Gold, a new linker, intended to be faster than Gnu LD

2015(?): Lld a drop in replacement linker, at least 2x as fast as Gold

2021: mold, a new linker, several times faster than lld

2025: wild, a new linker...

replies(4): >>42816811 #>>42817077 #>>42817811 #>>42819983 #
1. wolfd ◴[] No.42817077[source]
I’m not sure if you’re intending to leave a negative or positive remark, or just a brief history, but the fact that people are still managing to squeeze better performance into linkers is very encouraging to me.
replies(1): >>42817366 #
2. ajb ◴[] No.42817366[source]
Certainly no intention to be negative. Not having run the numbers, I don't know if the older ones got slower over time due to more features, or the new ones are squeezing out new performance gains. I guess it's also partly that the bigger codebases scaled up so much over this period, so that there are gains to be had that weren't interesting before.
replies(1): >>42817965 #
3. wolfd ◴[] No.42817965[source]
Good question, I always wonder the same thing. https://www.phoronix.com/news/Mold-Linker-2024-Performance seems to show that that the newer linkers still outperform their predecessors, even after maturing. But of course this doesn’t show the full picture.