ae5d06dc53
- 10.5% reduction of o//depend dependency graph
- 8.8% reduction in latency of make command
- Fix issue with temporary file cleanup
There's a new -w option in compile.com that turns off the recent
Landlock output path workaround for "good commands" which do not
unlink() the output file like GNU tooling does.
Our new GNU Make unveil sandboxing appears to have zero overhead
in the grand scheme of things. Full builds are pretty fast since
the only thing that's actually slowed us down is probably libcxx
make -j16 MODE=rel
RL: took 85,732,063µs wall time
RL: ballooned to 323,612kb in size
RL: needed 828,560,521µs cpu (11% kernel)
RL: caused 39,080,670 page faults (99% memcpy)
RL: 350,073 context switches (72% consensual)
RL: performed 0 reads and 11,494,960 write i/o operations
pledge() and unveil() no longer consider ENOSYS to be an error.
These functions have also been added to Python's cosmo module.
This change also removes some WIN32 APIs and System Five magnums
which we're not using and it's doubtful anyone else would be too
|
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| alg | ||
| bits | ||
| calls | ||
| crt | ||
| dns | ||
| elf | ||
| fmt | ||
| integral | ||
| intrin | ||
| isystem | ||
| linux | ||
| log | ||
| mem | ||
| nexgen32e | ||
| nt | ||
| rand | ||
| runtime | ||
| sock | ||
| stdio | ||
| str | ||
| stubs | ||
| sysv | ||
| testlib | ||
| thread | ||
| time | ||
| tinymath | ||
| unicode | ||
| x | ||
| zipos | ||
| assert.h | ||
| atomic.h | ||
| complex.h | ||
| dce.h | ||
| disclaimer.inc | ||
| dos.h | ||
| errno.h | ||
| inttypes.h | ||
| libc.mk | ||
| limits.h | ||
| literal.h | ||
| mach.h | ||
| macho.internal.h | ||
| macros-cpp.internal.inc | ||
| macros.internal.h | ||
| macros.internal.inc | ||
| math.h | ||
| notice.inc | ||
| notice.internal.h | ||
| paths.h | ||
| README.md | ||
| type2str.h | ||
| zip.h | ||
Cosmopolitan Standard Library
This directory defines static archives defining functions, like
printf(), mmap(), win32, etc. Please note that the Cosmopolitan
build configuration doesn't link any C/C++ library dependencies
by default, so you still have the flexibility to choose the one
provided by your system. If you'd prefer Cosmopolitan, just add
$(LIBC) and $(CRT) to your linker arguments.
Your library is compromised of many bite-sized static archives. We use the checkdeps tool to guarantee that the contents of the archives are organized in a logical way that's easy to use with or without our makefile infrastructure, since there's no cyclic dependencies.
The Cosmopolitan Library exports only the most stable canonical
system calls for all supported operating systems, regardless of
which platform is used for compilation. We polyfill many of the
APIs, e.g. read(), write() so they work consistently everywhere
while other apis, e.g. CreateWindowEx(), might only work on one
platform, in which case they become no-op functions on others.
Cosmopolitan polyfill wrappers will usually use the dollar sign naming convention, so they may be bypassed when necessary. This same convention is used when multiple implementations of string library and other performance-critical function are provided to allow Cosmopolitan to go fast on both old and newer computers.
We take an approach to configuration that relies heavily on the
compiler's dead code elimination pass (libc/dce.h). Most of the
code is written so that, for example, folks not wanting support
for OpenBSD can flip a bit in SUPPORT_VECTOR and that code will
be omitted from the build. The same is true for builds that are
tuned using -march=native which effectively asks the library to
not include runtime support hooks for x86 processors older than
what you use.
Please note that, unlike Cygwin or MinGW, Cosmopolitan does not achieve broad support by bolting on a POSIX emulation layer. We do nothing more than (in most cases) stateless API translations that get you 90% of the way there in a fast lightweight manner. We therefore can't address some of the subtle differences, such as the nuances of absolute paths on Windows. Our approach could be compared to something more along the lines of, "the Russians just used a pencil to write in space", versus spending millions researching a pen like NASA.