On Tue, Apr 09, 2024 at 09:26:49AM -0700, Jacob Champion wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 7:30 AM Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>> I think Michael's point was that if we carry the code we should test we
>> can run it. The other possibility would be just to remove it. I can see
>> arguments for both.
>
> Hm. If it's not acceptable to carry this (as a worse-is-better smoke
> test) without also running it during tests, then my personal vote
> would be to tear it out and just have people write/contribute targeted
> benchmarks when they end up working on performance. I don't think the
> cost/benefit makes sense at that point.
And you may catch up a couple of bugs while on it. In my experience,
things with custom makefile and/or meson rules tend to rot easily
because everybody forgets about them. There are a few of them in the
tree that could be ripped off, as well..
--
Michael