delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
From: | timolmst AT cyberramp DOT net |
Newsgroups: | comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
Subject: | Re: gcc compiles so slow? |
Date: | Sat, 21 Dec 1996 16:36:45 GMT |
Organization: | CyberRamp.net, Dallas, TX (214) 340-2020/(817) 226-2020 for info |
Lines: | 15 |
Message-ID: | <59h3dj$23r$1@newshost.cyberramp.net> |
References: | <199612171748 DOT MAA13875 AT delorie DOT com> |
NNTP-Posting-Host: | pm4-16.cyberramp.net |
To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
DJ-Gateway: | from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> wrote: >You can't extrapolate from such a small sample (one test). You need >to compile a larger source also to determine what the static overhead >is. For example, Borland might be 0.1 sec/line, but DJGPP might be >0.05 sec/line plus 8 seconds of overhead. I think you're all missing the important point here. What diffference does it make? I can't tel thedifference between 0.1 sec/line and 0.05 sec/line. It's no big deal. Try asking Borland, or Microsuck, for free tech support! They'll just ask you what kind of funny plant vapors you've been smoking.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |