This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: C++ compile-time regressions (was: GCC 3.0.1 Status Report)
- To: pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at (Gerald Pfeifer)
- Subject: Re: C++ compile-time regressions (was: GCC 3.0.1 Status Report)
- From: Joe Buck <jbuck at synopsys dot COM>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 13:28:58 -0700 (PDT)
- Cc: jbuck at synopsys dot com (Joe Buck), mark at codesourcery dot com (Mark Mitchell), gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org (gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org)
I wrote:
> > Smaller binaries too ... maybe the compiler's going to be OK after all. :-)
>
> No. Not yet. :-( Performance benchmarks are *detrimental*. Desastrous. :-(
To make progress I think we'll need to look at the generated code and
figure out why it is so bad. By far the worst result seems to be for
STRATCOMP1-ALL:
> |2.95 -O2|2.95 -O3| 3.0 -O2| 3.0 -O3|3.0.1-O2|3.0.1-O3|
> ---------------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
> STRATCOMP1-ALL | 8.26 | 8.07 | 94.42 | 94.50 | 107.90 | 103.03 |
Can you try to isolate where the bad code is?