This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: PCH [Was: Re: Target FUNCTION_{PRO,EPI}LOGUE question]
- To: Daniel Berlin <dan at cgsoftware dot com>, "dewar at gnat dot com" <dewar at gnat dot com>
- Subject: Re: PCH [Was: Re: Target FUNCTION_{PRO,EPI}LOGUE question]
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2001 09:31:30 -0700
- cc: "geoffk at geoffk dot org" <geoffk at geoffk dot org>, "neil at daikokuya dot demon dot co dot uk" <neil at daikokuya dot demon dot co dot uk>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
> I went to speed test mark's parser, but it's not in good enough shape
> to run the same tests i had run to get my pch benchmarks.
Yes -- it's in the "no real code actually works" state. By the end
of the week, I hope to have it better. It's 80% feature-complete
which means probably 30-50% done in terms of work, plus debugging.
> However, i doubt it'll make up the difference pch does.
I'm sure it won't. Every C++ compiler out there supports precompiled
headers because none of their parsers is fast enough. I am not a genius,
so I don't expect to outdo their combined expertise.
In general, parsing must be at least linear in the size of input program;
PCH can be considerably better.
--
Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com