This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC 3.3
- From: Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at>
- To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Steven Bosscher <s dot bosscher at student dot tudelft dot nl>,"Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu>
- Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 21:18:20 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: GCC 3.3
- References: <1051588103.8343.880.camel@doubledemon.codesourcery.com> <200304291444.KAA19733@caip.rutgers.edu> <1051633670.8343.938.camel@doubledemon.codesourcery.com> <Pine.BSF.4.53.0304301842380.39433@naos.dbai.tuwien.ac.at><1051765235.3301.444.camel@minax.codesourcery.com>
On Thu, 30 Apr 2003, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> I just don't think that we're going to be able to fix this for 3.3 given
> where we presently are.
I cannot really disagree, even though we bailed out before 3.0, we
bailed out before 3.1, and now we bail out before 3.3 again.
(The fact that we would be even slower without your various compile-time
improvements based on the examples I provided makes this even worse,
somehow.)
However, I take this as a clear indication that we need to rethink our
release process -- we cannot expect intricate issues like compile-time
performance to be solved on a release-branch, that's the resumé, I'd say,
so we must identify and take care of them before.
> The good news is that LANL is interested in seeing the C++ compiler run
> faster, so Zack and Nathan and I *are* looking at these issues, from a
> variety of different angles.
>
> We are lucky in that LANL and Apple (among others, perhaps) are actively
> supporting improvements in this area.
Good news!
Gerald
--
Gerald "Jerry" pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at http://www.pfeifer.com/gerald/