Re: GCC 3.3, GCC 3.4

[Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at redhat dot com>]

>I would look at it a different way.  It does improve the compiler, so
>we should do it.  But it doesn't identify where the 3.2 -> 3.3
>regression came from; I think we're still no closer to identifying
>that regression than we were.

Agree, 100%. There are two issues.

1) Magic constants, setting memory to 16MB, improving compile speed
right now. Arguments that bumping up this value doesn't speed compiles
are ludicrous, and ignore experimental evidence.

2) figuring out what happened between 3.2 and 3.3, or 3.4 and 3.3. There
are no clear fixes for this right now. There are a lot of clever people
looking at it so I'm sure something will eventually turn up. 

I'd rather the people working on #2 set their memory limits artificially
low (just as easy, use the same command line flags) then continue to
make the rest of us suffer.

Apple has already done #1 in their production compiler. I'd advocate
that Red Hat should do the same.

-benjamin