From:	"Andrew Crabtree" <andrewc AT rosemail DOT rose DOT hp DOT com>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Is PGCC really worth it?
Date:	Tue, 24 Feb 1998 11:55:31 -0800
Organization:	Hewlett Packard
Lines:	21
Message-ID:	<6cv8jd$d75$1@rosenews.rose.hp.com>
References:	<01bd4150$afde1c00$LocalHost AT default>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	ros51675cra.rose.hp.com
Mime-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

Rylan wrote in message <01bd4150$afde1c00$LocalHost AT default>...
>I am writing an application that might benefit a lot form intensive
>optimisation. Using -O3 (or -O2 with various switches) does seem to help,
>but I'm thinking that Pentium opti's might be even better.
It depends what you mean by 'intensize optimisation'.  Generally, huge speed
increases are only realized by changes of a high-level nature.  Often times
you can get performance gains in the 100+% range by changing your method.
With compiler level optimizations you are talking about typically 5-30%.
Combining the two is the best approach, but if you have to choose one, go
with the good high level method.

>worth it to go PGCC, 'cause I heard that lots of stuff is "broken" in PGCC
Such as?  I've gotten a whoppin total of 0 bug reports against the C
compiler from the 1.0.1 release (C++ does have a few problems).

>and, if I do go PGCC, will it really give me a noticeable speed advantage,
>if I use the PGCC libc too?
Depends on the application.

- Raw text -