This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Stepanov results with development gcc
- To: David Edelsohn <dje at watson dot ibm dot com>
- Subject: Re: Stepanov results with development gcc
- From: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at redhat dot com>
- Date: 08 Dec 2000 14:50:57 -0500
- Cc: Brad Lucier <lucier at math dot purdue dot edu>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- References: <200012081942.OAA29176@mal-ach.watson.ibm.com>
David Edelsohn <dje@watson.ibm.com> writes:
> Something seems strange with these results. 2.95.1 was perfect?
> 2.95.2 was perfect?
Yes.
In fact, on a gnupro 99r1 based branch compiler (BeOS) on x86, which is the
same time frame, we have better than perfect.
It's like .7 or .8.
>
> My results for abstraction penalty using gcc -O2 on AIX are:
>
> gcc-2.95.2 = 1.23-1.24
> gcc-2.95.3 = 1.22-1.29
>
> I do not have a current development gcc to test.
>
> David