GCC 3.5 Status (2004-08-29)

[Matt Austern]

On Aug 29, 2004, at 7:00 PM, Giovanni Bajo wrote:

> Mark Mitchell wrote:
>
>> If people want to put GCC 3.5 off until next
>> June, and SC approves, it's OK with me.
>
> I think this should be seriously considered. Given the large number of
> incomplete projects (partly merged like the vectorizer, or being 
> worked on
> offline), and the fact that we are currently maintaing *two* stable 
> release
> branches, I don't think we should *rush* at releasing 3.5. Waiting 
> another 6
> months could be a good compromise. What do others think about this?
>
>> Otherwise, I think we
>> proceed, and accept that the release will be useful to some people
>> and less useful to others.  (It will, for example, be useful to
>> people who need support for new targets, or want gfortran, or want
>> faster non-optimizing compile times, which we are now seeing for some
>> C++ programs.)
>
> As for C++ programs, I would like to remember that when tree-ssa was 
> merged,
> there were big C++ compile time issues at -O0, which used to be in the 
> merge
> requirement list, but were not met. There was agreement that these 
> would be
> tackled after the merge, possibly by running a couple of cleanup 
> optimization
> passes (DCE/CCP). I never heard of this project again since then, and 
> the
> issues seems to have been forgotten. I am sure I am not the only one 
> who cares
> about C++ compilation times at -O0: we got substantially better with 
> 3.4 (even
> wrt 2.95), but now we are regressing way too much.

You are not the only person who cares about C++ compilation times at 
-O0.  This is a major concern for Apple, and I expect that improving 
C++ -O0 compilation time will be my primary activity for some time.  I 
don't think the current status it too awful, actually, but we do still 
have a way to go.

Do you have any suggestions for improving -O0 compile speed?

			--Matt