This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcc compile-time performance
- From: Aaron Lehmann <aaronl at vitelus dot com>
- To: Dara Hazeghi <dhazeghi at pacbell dot net>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 09:40:03 -0700
- Subject: Re: gcc compile-time performance
- References: <200205151704.26905.dhazeghi@pacbell.net>
On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 05:04:26PM -0700, Dara Hazeghi wrote:
> with CFLAGS=-O0
> compiler buildtime
> gcc 2.7.2.3 0m34.060s
> gcc 2.8.1 0m36.720s
> gcc 2.90.29 0m37.270s
> gcc 2.91.66 0m38.380s
> gcc 2.95.3 0m43.710s
> gcc 3.0.4 0m51.370s
> gcc 3.1 (pre) 0m59.630s
It's also interesting to note how the compiler tree keeps taking
longer to compile.
I can't imagine recent gcc's compiling in under a minute on that kind
of hardware.
However, I do feel that generated code quality is an order of
magnitude more important than the time required to produce it, which
is in turn an order of magnitude more important than the time it takes
to build the compiler itself.
Then again, if I hacked on gcc and needed to recompile often I might
feel differently ;)