Message-ID:	<36EA7F86.ECA2268D@t-online.de>
Date:	Sat, 13 Mar 1999 16:08:54 +0100
Organization:	LISA GmbH
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.08 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.36 i686)
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	pgcc AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: AMDK6 optimized kernel and others
References:	<Pine DOT BSF DOT 3 DOT 96 DOT 990311222721 DOT 17329A-100000 AT recomnet DOT recomnet DOT net> <Pine DOT GSO DOT 3 DOT 95 DOT 990312082710 DOT 13124A-100000 AT c2m2-17 DOT nada DOT kth DOT se> <19990312173530 DOT E18971 AT cerebro DOT laendle>
X-Sender:	0303277050-0001 AT t-online DOT de
From:	hpj DOT lisa AT t-online DOT de (Hans-Peter Jansen)
Reply-To:	pgcc AT delorie DOT com

Marc Lehmann wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Mar 12, 1999 at 08:34:09AM +0100, Michael Hanke wrote:
> 
> > The main exception in my applications are qt/KDE/lyx. Does anybody
> > have experiences in the gain in speed for these programs?
 
as the limiting bandwidth for these cases is almost always the user ;-)
I prefer size over speed optimizations, as long as non calculation intensive
code is concerned.

> Well, given that my perl-gtk programs run just as fast as their c-written
> counterparts I don't think program speed is the limiting factor for these.
> (there are exceptions, of course, an opimized imlib or gimp does make a
> difference ;)

I will check this soon with the upcoming pgcc snapshot. Will you please
give us a message here, then.

Hans-Peter

> --
>       -----==-                                             |
>       ----==-- _                                           |
>       ---==---(_)__  __ ____  __       Marc Lehmann      +--
>       --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /       pcg AT goof DOT com      |e|
>       -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\       XX11-RIPE         --+
>     The choice of a GNU generation                       |
>                                                          |

- Raw text -