Re: Suggestions for improving gcc 3.2 compilation speed?

[Lars Segerlund <lars dot segerlund at comsys dot se>]

 Well,

  Borland comes to mind, as does Lattice ( althoug lattice was slow, 
gcc was much slower when I started using it ), a better question is what 
compiler is slower than gcc ? Even microsofts compiler and IDE is 
blazingly fast compared to gcc.

  We all had the comparison with tcc a while ago ( which is quite 
unfair ), but shows how much room for improvement there is.

 However it seem's to get better :-) ...

 / Regards, Lars

Biagio Lucini wrote:
> Could you give me an example of a fast compiler? My only term of
> comparison is the Intel one, and with it it takes ages to compile the most
> trivial program.
>
> Biagio
>
> On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, Lars Segerlund wrote:
>
>
> >  I like gcc, however I think this pinpoints the problem of using it for
> > real software developement, it's painfully slow and getting slower all
> > the time. When I get some time I will also look if I can give some help
> > in making it faster, however this is a problem since people are starting
> > to abandon gcc, ( for everything exept trivial stuff ).
> >
> >  Gcc would need a 50 % speedup in this case to be deemed usefull, and I
> > believe a speedup of 100%-200% would be necessary in order to put it on
> > par with most other compilers.
> >
> >  I just want to point out this in retrospect of the previous discussion
> > about compilation speed as a real issue, not to restart the debate.
> >
> >  / Lars Segerlund.