This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

RE: gcc compile-time performance

> High-reliability software often runs on "old" hardware; the Hubble Space
> Telescope runs a recently-installed 80486-based computer, while the space
> shuttle uses 8086s!

Yes, but this is a perfectly example of an irrelevant point. No one is
bootstrapping any compilers on the space station (which actually uses 386's
more widely), and anyone building software for this platform will be using
modern fast machines. What counts on the space station is performance of
the generated code. So this particular line of reasoning is not really
relevant to the discussion of compile time.

> The reality is that people do serious, professional work for a large segment
> of the computing populace on "old" systems. And gcc should recognize that,

Yes, but as above, this is for targets. I don't know of people doing
serious professional *development" on old junk systems. Or at least not
this (386 and 496) junky! Actually in the PC world, people tend to have
very fast machines (you can after all buy a new gigahertz machine from a
major manufacturer for $500 these days). Sometimes in the unix world we
see people using older boxes, since some of that hardware is still very

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]