Mail Archives: pgcc/1999/03/09/16:13:19
On Thu, Mar 04, 1999 at 01:24:33AM +0100, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
>
> # pgcc fail:
> # -fcompare-elim -floop-after-global -fcombine-222
>
> all at the expense of a significant bigger binary.
>
> This really desillusionized me about the capabilities of all this
> funky optimizing stuff... Mostly they are not worth the bigger size
> they need (and the time figuring out the best switches).
>
> Real optimisation happens in the design phase of a project.
> The compiler can help you getting the most of it!
>
> Correct me, if I'm wrong.
>
> Sorry, Marc. Please don't feel offended. As I'm an optimist, I will
> look forward and see, how I can help you to get behind it...
I don't feel offended, but on which CPU did you do your tests? My
slackware 1995 binary runs significantly slower on my machine (p-ii) than
the pgcc compiled ones, that is with current pgcc as well as the old libc5
binary that we happen to have on our homepage.
This is with the snapshot pgcc, btw. The release might have some
hand-tuning to be correct rather than fast in some cases.
--
-----==- |
----==-- _ |
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +--
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / pcg AT goof DOT com |e|
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+
The choice of a GNU generation |
|
- Raw text -