From:	pavenis AT lanet DOT lv
To:	DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Mon, 8 May 2000 19:32:35 +0200
MIME-Version:	1.0
Subject:	Re: Perfomance of gc-simple
Message-ID:	<39171653.5378.B2D59A@localhost>
In-reply-to:	<200005081630.MAA18562@envy.delorie.com>
References:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1000507111811 DOT 21782K-100000 AT is> (message from Eli Zaretskii on Sun, 7 May 2000 11:21:26 +0300 (IDT))
X-mailer:	Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On 8 May 2000, at 12:30, DJ Delorie wrote:

> 
> Note that ggc-page also uses /dev/zero, which djgpp doesn't have.  Or,
> it needs to be able to map anonymous pages, which may also be hard
> with DJGPP.
> 

It's not only problem. 

With increase of GCC version it's becomming more and more memory 
hungry (my tests under Linux with gcc-2.95.2 
and recent snapshots of gcc-2.96 shows that gcc-2.96 took more than
1.5 times memory amount gcc-2.95.2 needed for compiling some 600 
lines C++ source which rather heavily used STL). So could we accept
serious wasting memory when we have only 64Mb in DOS sessions
under Win9X or WinNT. Need to move to  plain DOS (with 
CWSDPMI) or using cross-compiler for larger C++ sources would not 
be very nice. Also libstdc++ perhaps will have tendencies to grow and
consume  more memory for compiling...

Andris

- Raw text -