This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: 3.3-branch QA assessment
- From: Roger Sayle <roger at www dot eyesopen dot com>
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: Neil Booth <neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk>
- Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 09:11:54 -0700 (MST)
- Subject: Re: 3.3-branch QA assessment
> But isn't 3.4 slower again than 3.3? I believe it is; we're just
> following a trend after all 8-) Any bets on 3.5?
The latest graphs show that bootstrap times are decreasing:
http://www.suse.de/~aj/SPEC/CINT/d-permanent/Bootstrap-time_big.png
There are also a significant number of patches to improve compile
time performance awaiting review, or have slipped through the cracks
in the review process. For example, the stirling work of Apple and
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-01/msg00633.html
[I can't imagine why a 5% reduction in compile times wouldn't be one
of the most important postings waiting on gcc-patches].
Much like deities you can't *ask* volunteer reviewers to give priority
to compiler performance improving patches, you can just pray for
them to intercede on your behalf :>
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-01/msg01627.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-01/msg01644.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-01/msg01670.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-01/msg01164.html
Roger
--
Roger Sayle, E-mail: roger@eyesopen.com
OpenEye Scientific Software, WWW: http://www.eyesopen.com/
Suite 1107, 3600 Cerrillos Road, Tel: (+1) 505-473-7385
Santa Fe, New Mexico, 87507. Fax: (+1) 505-473-0833