This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Compilation performance comparison of 3.5.0 and TreeSSA trees on MICO sources as requested in: [tree-ssa] Merge status 2004-05-03
- From: dewar at gnat dot com (Robert Dewar)
- To: Joe dot Buck at synopsys dot COM, dewar at gnat dot com
- Cc: dnovillo at redhat dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu
- Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 13:42:11 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: Compilation performance comparison of 3.5.0 and TreeSSA trees on MICO sources as requested in: [tree-ssa] Merge status 2004-05-03
> Yes, I mentioned that (at least indirectly): simple optimization for space
> speeds up the compiler, because there are fewer instructions to process
> through RTL, assembler, and linker.
You missed my point, I am not just concerned with compile time. I am
concerned that if you have an executable that is several hundred
megabytes, then you can run into all kinds of downstream limitations
huge memory requirements, bumping against memory limits, download times
getting too long, debugger getting too slow etc.
So I think the performance of -O0 code in terms of space is in fact