This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: New GCC releases comparison and comparison of GCC4.4 and LLVM2.5 on SPEC2000
Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Andi Kleen <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>> Rather, we should seriously understand what caused the compilation time
>>> jump in 4.2, and whether those are still a problem. We made a good job
>>> in 4.0 and 4.3 offsetting the slowdowns from infrastructure changes with
>>> speedups from other changes; and 4.4 while slower than 4.3 at least
>>> stays below 4.2. But, 4.2 was a disaster for compilation time.
>> Yes that would be useful, although I admit for me personally
>> make -j and icecream do a pretty good job at hiding that pain.
> Yes, well...
> Given the continuous complaints/bashes from some of your fellow kernel
> hackers and many others, it still is still important to address the
> compilation time issues. There still is enough low-hanging fruit.
Us Cygwin folks will not be complaining about any improvements in
compile-time issues either :-) We have a fair amount of emulation overhead to
live with as it is.