Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 11:21:21 +0200
From: Corinna Vinschen <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: GCC-3 additions - related question
Message-ID: <20011015112121.J1696@cygbert.vinschen.de>
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
References: <002901c154a1$03e8c9a0$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20011014203220 DOT 85319 DOT qmail AT web14510 DOT mail DOT yahoo DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <20011014203220.85319.qmail@web14510.mail.yahoo.com>; from danny_r_smith_2001@yahoo.co.nz on Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 06:32:20AM +1000

On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 06:32:20AM +1000, Danny Smith wrote:
>  --- Robert Collins <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au> wrote: > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Danny Smith" <danny_r_smith_2001 AT yahoo DOT co DOT nz>
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > Lately, I've been hearing this with STL code:
> > > "This compile well using gcc!  Why it not MS!"
> > > Thats what I want -- the first part of that anyway.
> > 
> > Danny, it sounds like you might know the answer to this: are there known
> > issues for building native code using the cygwin gcc with C++ templates?
> > 
> > Specifically, I've asked Chris on the developer list about using
> > templates for some stuff (iterators particularly are getting real old
> > for me), see
> > http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-developers/2001-10/msg00018.html
> > for the thread.
> 
> 
> I've built STLPort, Bench++ (Stepanov benchmarking suite) and some of the
> Boost package with mingw 2.95.3 and gcc's ability to build template code is
> not a problem compared with what I've read for other windows compilers. 
> The issue is with efficiency.  Efficiency of writing generic code may be
> enhanced by templates.  But...  Debugging template code is a real pain  --
> stange errors with instantiatiation of templates have to be tracked through
> a maze of headers.  And there is a runtime performance hit.  I don't have
> the Bench++ results handy but there was a significant penalty for using
> generic template code compared to C code.   I expect gcc-3.0 to be better,
> at least as far as speed of compiled code. Speed of compilation, however,
> is a problem when your testing.
> 
> I would agree with Corinna.

Another reservation was the observation in earlier gccs that using
templates bloats the size of the executable/dll drastically.  Is that
still true?

Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                                mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat, Inc.