This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcc 3.5 integration branch proposal
- From: Karel Gardas <kgardas at objectsecurity dot com>
- To: Mark Hahn <hahn at physics dot mcmaster dot ca>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 09:25:57 +0100 (CET)
- Subject: Re: gcc 3.5 integration branch proposal
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004, Mark Hahn wrote:
> IMO, GCC should ignore compiler performance unless regressions are >= 2x.
E.g. so 1.5 slower GCC 3.4 in comparison with GCC 3.3 is ok, and then 1.5
slower GCC 3.5 in comparison with GCC 3.4 is again ok, etc, etc? Do you
> and when a tradeoff is necessary, 5% better code is worth 2x compile time.
> obviously, I'm interested in code that is run more often than compiled.
As a GCC user I'm insterested in as fast as possible C++ compiler. Guys,
this is a real pain to see how Comeau and/or Intel compiles faster than
GCC 3.3.x :-( (I'm sorry for this complain). And in addition I guess these
two are not the fastest C++ compilers in the industry... I was really
surprised seeing M$ VC 7.1 compiling much faster with all optimization
switch on than GCC at -O0 and even the code produced runs a bit faster
than those compiled by GCC with -O2...
> but isn't that the whole point of a compiler? maybe another factor is people
> trying to use GCC where they should use a scripting language instead.
I guess you have forgotten that compiler is also needed for software
Karel Gardas firstname.lastname@example.org
ObjectSecurity Ltd. http://www.objectsecurity.com