middle-end/3973: GCC fails to bootstrap with 80+160MB memory / optimization

[Wolfgang Bangerth]

> > I would not even pretend I would disagree with you on the matter of
> > compile time and memory consumption, but every time I brought this up
> > (even with numbers from our own project), nothing really happens.
> 
> Have you created high-priority PRs for such projects? That might be
> better than this PR...

The project is 200k lines of template heavy C++. Not exactly a smaller 
testcase. I occasionally filed reports for cases where compile time 
exploded (and these were fixed mostly), but the general trend of 3.3 being 
(more than) twice as slow as 2.95 for example is unchecked, and I don't 
have a simple testcase for that, unfortunately.

In fact, there are testcases already around: the automatic SPEC testers 
also log daily compile times for fixed programs. Every once in a while 
someone notices that something gets slower and sometimes even can point to 
a particular patch, but the general trend is not broken by that.


> > So what should we do?
> 
> ...which I agree to close.

I'll do it, but only with a certain amount of reluctance :-(

W.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolfgang Bangerth             email:            bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu
                              www: http://www.ticam.utexas.edu/~bangerth/