X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
X-Trace-PostClient-IP:	68.147.232.190
From:	Brian Inglis <Brian DOT Inglis AT SystematicSW DOT Invalid>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: gcc 4.10 thinks it is 5x faster than 4.01
Organization:	Systematic Software
Message-ID:	<4jfh22lcje6dd2icmigtf2s3c7n19sigi8@4ax.com>
References:	<1143502002 DOT 445175 DOT 231640 AT v46g2000cwv DOT googlegroups DOT com>
X-Newsreader:	Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
MIME-Version:	1.0
Lines:	26
Date:	Tue, 28 Mar 2006 04:42:15 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host:	64.59.135.176
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT shaw DOT ca
X-Trace:	pd7tw2no 1143520935 64.59.135.176 (Mon, 27 Mar 2006 21:42:15 MST)
NNTP-Posting-Date:	Mon, 27 Mar 2006 21:42:15 MST
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

On 27 Mar 2006 15:26:42 -0800 in comp.os.msdos.djgpp, "Bob W"
<dontsend AT operamail DOT com> wrote:

>After checking out gcc version 4.10 the first test already
>revealed a flaw:
>
>My test-program reported that it was running about
>5 times as fast as compared to its 4.01 compiled version.
>
>As I don't believe in miracles, I suspect that a bug has
>crawled into the clock() function and/or the CLOCKS_PER_SEC
>definition.
>
>I have further noticed a 6% jitter in the values which
>are returned by clock() after about 5 seconds. But this is
>not necessarily related to the above mentioned problem.
>
>(Console window, Win XP-P)

Did you recompile and rebuild libc with gcc 4.01 and 4.10? 

-- 
Thanks. Take care, Brian Inglis 	Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Brian DOT Inglis AT CSi DOT com 	(Brian[dot]Inglis{at}SystematicSW[dot]ab[dot]ca)
    fake address		use address above to reply

- Raw text -