Yes, but you still need to build the libraries, so the speed up
will not be as much as you might hope.
Excerpts from Joachim Breitner's message of 2017-10-22 22:19:03 -0400:
> I guess I could just try it, but maybe someone knows it, or knows what
> would go wrong…
> If I run nofib with ghc-stage1 instead of ghc-stage2, I should get
> the same results, right? (ignoring compilation times here)
> My hope is that it can speed up perf.haskell.org some more.
Am Sonntag, den 22.10.2017, 23:14 -0400 schrieb Joachim Breitner:
> Am Sonntag, den 22.10.2017, 22:23 -0400 schrieb Edward Z. Yang:
> > Yes, but you still need to build the libraries, so the speed up
> > will not be as much as you might hope.
> sure, but when you build every GHC commit, then even a small
> improvement is nice.
> Do you know the proper way of building only libraries + ghc-stage1?
nevermind, perf.haskell.org also measures compiler performances (in the
test suite), so I need stage2.