This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC Compile-Time Regressions
- From: Neil Booth <neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk>
- To: Ziemowit Laski <zlaski at apple dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 20:57:02 +0000
- Subject: Re: GCC Compile-Time Regressions
- References: <F023FF71-3F94-11D7-944E-00039390FFE2@apple.com>
Ziemowit Laski wrote:-
> Just for completeness, I thought I'd share my measurements for release
> branches other than 3.3.x.
>
> Currently, there is some controversy as to whether 3.4/TOT is actually
> slower than 3.3. My measurements
> consistently confirm this thesis, although some folks apparently found
> the reverse to be true. A suggestion
> has been made (on this list, I believe) that 3.4 may be slower on small
> files but faster on big ones. So,
> is my test case considered small or large? The structparser.cpp file
> itself is indeed very small, but it
> pulls in a lot of Qt and STL gunk via #include and balloons up to 1 Mb,
> which I would no longer consider
> small. So, if someone (other than me) could do some systematic
> 3.3-vs-3.4 measurements and post the results
> here, that would be great.
How come the .ii file is so different? /me guesses tabs have become
spaces.
Neil.