Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
From:	Mumit Khan <khan AT xraylith DOT wisc DOT EDU>
X-Authentication-Warning:	mercury.xraylith.wisc.edu: khan owned process doing -bs
Date:	Sat, 12 Jun 1999 12:35:14 -0500 (CDT)
To:	William Gacquer <wgacquer AT ubisoft DOT fr>
cc:	cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Subject:	RE: [ANN] gcc-2.95 1999-06-09 dev snapshot for Cygwin
In-Reply-To:	<C909A156E356D2119F1300A0C9CE774801D81146@SRVMAIL_FR>
Message-ID:	<Pine.LNX.3.96.990612123240.13865A-100000@mercury.xraylith.wisc.edu>
MIME-Version:	1.0

On Fri, 11 Jun 1999, William Gacquer wrote:

> Hello!
> 	I did some benchmarks in order to compare egcs 1.1.2 with gcc 2.95.
> The last one is much slower than egcs 1.1.2 (except in one test). Why are
> the binaries (with full optimisation) so slow with gcc 2.95?

I have no idea. It would be very useful if you can send a few testcases 
to egcs AT egcs DOT cygnus DOT com.

> On which egcs branch is it based?

GCC and EGCS are now merged, so egcs branch is irrelevant. The gcc-2.95
branch is based mostly on the egcs mainline (not the egcs-1.1.x branch).

Regards,
Mumit



--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com

- Raw text -