Subject: Re[2]: C++ Compilers : Comparative Performance Testsuite
From: "Gerrit P. Haase" <[email-masked]>
To: "Alex Vinokur" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 16:06:30 +0100

Hello Alex,

Monday, November 3, 2003, 7:44:16 PM, you wrote:

> "Gerrit P. Haase" <[email-masked]> wrote in message
> news:[email-masked]...
>> Alex wrote:
>>
>> > An algorithm which computes very long Fibonacci numbers
>> >
>> >
>> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=bnni5p%2412i47o%241%40ID-79865.news.uni-berlin.de
>> >   was used as a performance testsuite
>> >   to compare speed of the code produced by various compilers.
>>
>> >
>> |------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>> > |               Digital Mars C/C++ Compiler, STLport 4.5.3
>> >
>> |------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>> > | Version 8.35n        | -   | 0.20 : 0.16 | 0.84 : 0.80 |  3.82 :  3.74 |
>> >
>> |========================================================================|
>>
>>
>> Do you think to use STLport with the Cygwin/MinGW compiler would
>> increase perfomance?

> [snip]
> New report which contains STLport with the Cygwin has been posted
> to news:gmane.os.cygwin under title "C++ Compilers : Comparative
> Performance Measurement".
> See :
> * news://news.gmane.org/[email-masked]
> * http://article.gmane.org/gmane.os.cygwin/40086.

Interesting, it is really a little faster when libstdc++ is directly
compared with the STLport library.  So it would make sense to use it when
performance is an issue.

-- 
Best regards,
 Gerrit

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/