This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcc compile-time performance
- From: Toon Moene <toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl>
- To: Robert Dewar <dewar at gnat dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, gdr at codesourcery dot com, scott at coyotegulch dot com
- Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 22:48:18 +0200
- Subject: Re: gcc compile-time performance
- Organization: Moene Computational Physics, Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
- References: <20020518203300.3EF5EF28D4@nile.gnat.com>
Robert Dewar wrote:
> Ah sorry I missed the 77 vs 90 implication of your previous message.
> Are you saying that people trust g77 more than they trust the
> proprietary compilers. Is that a technical point of view? The reason
> I ask is that I am trying to get a sense of how reliable g77 is at
> this stage. Is there anyone providing support for g77?
It's not trust in the sense of "It's better to use g77 because it'll
generate code that's guaranteed to work", but trust in the sense "g77
will be around in ten years time because it's free software and the
maintainers will keep it around if I yell".
I (personally) provide support via the gcc-help mailing list, the
Fortran-90 mailing list and the newsgroup comp.lang.fortran.
On the news group, I'm certainly not the only one who answers questions
regarding g77 - even staunch supporters of the F2K effort (like myself,
the Standard's editor Richard Maine and several others) will try to
gauge people into using features that are Fortran 90 - approved, but
happen to be supported by g77.
Hope this helps,
Toon Moene - mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org - phoneto: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
Maintainer, GNU Fortran 77: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/g77_news.html
Join GNU Fortran 95: http://g95.sourceforge.net/ (under construction)