This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Compiler for Red Hat Linux 8
- To: Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at>
- Subject: Re: Compiler for Red Hat Linux 8
- From: Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 14:14:29 +0200
- Cc: Geoff Keating <geoffk at redhat dot com>, <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- References: <Pine.BSF.4.33.0107182222380.35689-100000@deneb.dbai.tuwien.ac.at>
Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at> writes:
> [ Disclaimer: I *am* speaking for DBAI. :-) ]
;-)
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
>> Going to GCC 3.0 is IMO the right way.
>
> ...though be prepared to receive extremely bad and annoyed feedback
> from those of your customers doing heavy duty C++ development.
>
> Here at DBAI, for example, we simply cannot use GCC 3.0 because it's
> an order of magnitude slower while generating larger and also slower
> binaries. I don't know, though, what this means for KDE and other
> code you need to compile as part of your GNU/Linux distribution.
So, your advice for distributors would be to wait for GCC 3.1 - or use
a compiler taken from the GCC 3.1 branch ...
> Though, if Red Hat could contribute developer time to address this kind of
> problems on the GCC 3.0-branch, that would make a lot of sense I guess,
> for there *are* significant improvements in the C++ frontend per se which
> will be strongly appreciated by many customers.
... unless somebody improves the GCC 3.0 branch significantly?
Btw. what are exactly the problems you're facing with GCC 3.0?
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger
SuSE Labs aj@suse.de
private aj@arthur.inka.de
http://www.suse.de/~aj