GCC 3.3 compile speed regression - AN ANSWER

[tm_gccmail@mail.kloo.net]

On Wed, 12 Feb 2003, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> 
> On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 tm_gccmail@mail.kloo.net wrote:
> 
> > So, why don't you program in assembly? It's because C is a more convenient
> > representation for expressing program functionality.
> 
> Your argument makes no sense. It's been pointed out several times that gcc 
> is on the order of 4-6 times slower than comparable other C compilers. Not 
> assembly language. C. 
> 
> And I've pointed out several times that the generated code quality doesn't 
> seem to be improving, and I've not gotten any pushback on that either. I 
> bet most gcc people know this in their hearts.
> 
> So why do you bother to argue against the fact that gcc is slow, and tell 
> me that I should use assembly language? Your argument is totally 
> irrelevant and pointless.
> 
> 				Linus

I wasn't suggesting you code in assembly language. It was an example of
how some programming languages are more convenient for some purposes than
others, much like how some data structures are more convenient for some
types of optimization than others.

I would still  recommend you read the rest of my original message - it is
reasonably informative.

Toshi