From:	Eugene Leitl <eugene DOT leitl AT lrz DOT uni-muenchen DOT de>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Date:	Wed, 23 Jun 1999 13:46:20 -0700 (PDT)
To:	pgcc AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: performance issue
In-Reply-To:	<19990623150531.A9441@cerebro.laendle>
References:	<19990621182836 DOT O28893 AT io DOT txc DOT com>
	<19990623150531 DOT A9441 AT cerebro DOT laendle>
X-Mailer:	VM 6.43 under 20.4 "Emerald" XEmacs Lucid
Message-ID:	<14193.18042.784347.242833@lrz.de>
Reply-To:	pgcc AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	pgcc AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

<idiotmode>
Apropos another CPU you don't have: do you think that K7 will be as
quirky as K6 in respect to compiler options? Assuming both egcs/gcc
and pgcc.
</idiotmode>

TIA,

Eugene

Marc Lehmann writes:
 > The principle problem with the k6 is that I don't have one, so I can't
 > check ;) I've ported the k6 code from egcs because I thought it was done
 > by people _having_ an k6, however, and now Jan claims that the egcs code
 > is basically bad for performance.

- Raw text -