We're out of tree codes; now what?

[Kaveh R. GHAZI]

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, Mike Stump wrote:

> I did some quick C measurements compiling expr.o from the top of the
> tree, with an -O0 built compiler with checking:
> [...]
> I'll accept a  0.15% compiler.

Hi Mike,

When I brought up the 16-bit option earlier, Jakub replied that x86 would
get hosed worse because it's 16-bit accesses are not as efficient as it's
8 or 32 bit ones.

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-03/msg00763.html

I assume you tested on Darwin?  Can you tell me if it was ppc or x86?

		Thanks,
		--Kaveh
--
Kaveh R. Ghazi			ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu