Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From:	"Dockeen" <dockeen AT mchsi DOT com>
To:	<cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject:	Re: GCC 3.1
Date:	Thu, 30 May 2002 21:48:16 +0600
Message-ID:	<NCBBLKKJGBJOLDFMCKFPEEHECAAA.dockeen@mchsi.com>
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Priority:	3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
Importance:	Normal
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000

I have run some standard scene generation code that I use at work
as a regression test for gcc-3.1, c++.

The results agreed with the baseline Cygwin gcc.  The 3.1 code was
about 10 - 15% faster in this particular application.

Note that the exe created was much larger, but you can get around
that if you need to by using stip.

That is my "braod spectrum" (ROFLMAO) testing.

Wayne Keen

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -