On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 08:44:34AM -0600, Scott Long wrote: > >No, I'm not going to do it because of lack of knowledge, there are > >people who have more experience with it than me. > > > Well, as I said in another email, switching to GCC 4 just because of > dubious "25% faster" (faster at what? compiling? resulting generated > code? crashing?) claims in the changelog is not a terribly good > reason =-) 25% faster to compile the code, not running it. > It seems that every time GCC claims to get "faster", our > buildworld times increase by 10%. Maybe the generated code is > better and faster, but it's no secret that gcc spends a lot more > CPU cycles on code genreation and optimization than it did in the > 2.x series. Note also that the GCC 4.0 changelog mentions that > the -O0 flag is faster; that's wonderful, but has no practical > value to real people. -KirillReceived on Mon Apr 25 2005 - 12:52:18 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:32 UTC