This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: C compile time
- From: Scott Robert Ladd <coyote at coyotegulch dot com>
- To: Dara Hazeghi <dhazeghi at yahoo dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, s dot bosscher at student dot tudelft dot nl, pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
- Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 15:30:54 -0400
- Subject: Re: C compile time
- References: <20030618211325.59003.qmail@web41107.mail.yahoo.com>
Dara Hazeghi wrote:
> Scott, I added -g to the table. Do you consider -pg
> particularly important (from the real world)?
Given that -pg has little or no influence on compile time, the question
is moot.
Going back to -g for a moment: According to your tables, the overall
compile time has not increased precipitously for debug-style compiles.
While optimized compile times do indeed get slower with successive
versions of GCC, such compiles are only rarely made in my experience.
During development, the vast, vast majority of my compiles do not
include any optimization options or set them to -O0.
Therefore, I am somewhat confused as to why there is so much stress over
increasing compile times for optimized builds. I can see it as an issue
for very large executable images, such as the Linux kernel, or for
people who design and build source-based GNU/Linux distros like Gentoo.
But for the vast majority of working programmers, I simply don't see why
optimized compile times are such an issue.
I'm more than open to illumination on this topic.
--
Scott Robert Ladd
Coyote Gulch Productions (http://www.coyotegulch.com)