Mail Archives: djgpp/2001/10/17/13:14:53
Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2001, salvador wrote:
>
> > I agree with you DJ, but it looks like regular switchs (-O2 for example)
> > have a bad impact on old CPU models when using gcc 3.x.
> > I didn't run my battery of benchmarks yet so I can give a detailed
> > conclusion, but the new C++ library and code generation rules made my editor
> > 20% bigger (we are talking about more than 200 Kb of increase) and 11%
> > slower.
>
> It is very dangerous to compare C++ code compiled by GCC 3.x and any
> older version. GCC 3.x now supports much more of the C++ standard than
> older versions did; since Standard C++ is a *monstrously* large and
> complex language,
Yes, that's what I mean with:
I know the ISO C++ 1998 standard introduced a heavy use of
templates in the C++ standard library and is one of the reasons for
the
increase in code size and compilation time.
it should come as no surprise that full support for it
comes at a price.
A much better comparison would be with a C program, not a C++ program.
Yes, that's the case of BYTE tests.
In my case, the editor, none of the code involved in the meassurement I did
involves C++ standard library.
Is my formating code (for syntax highlight) blitting lines to the screen.
SET
--
Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET). (Electronics Engineer)
Visit my home page: http://welcome.to/SetSoft or
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Vista/6552/
Alternative e-mail: set AT computer DOT org set AT ieee DOT org
Address: Curapaligue 2124, Caseros, 3 de Febrero
Buenos Aires, (1678), ARGENTINA Phone: +(5411) 4759 0013
- Raw text -