Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 20:51:55 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199705210051.UAA20937@delorie.com>
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il
CC: green_background_chicken AT happillama DOT demon DOT co DOT uk, djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <Pine.SUN.3.91.970520170019.22684C-100000@is> (message from Eli
	Zaretskii on Tue, 20 May 1997 17:06:15 +0300 (IDT))
Subject: Re: Complaints about DJGPP
Precedence: bulk


> On Mon, 19 May 1997, DJ Delorie wrote:
> > > I also stand by the slow compile time and slow running time due to crap
> > > optimization,
> > 
> > No portable compiler produces better code than a platform-specific and
> > hand-optimized compiler.  Fact of life.
> 
> Frankly, I fail to understand how come people bother about compilation
> speed these days.

I was referring to the generated code, not the compiler itself.  One
of the reasons the FSF hasn't taken the PCG patches yet (I think) is
because they make the core of gcc less portable.

> Do you really build GCC or Quake ten times a day?

Quake only takes twenty seconds to compile and link, on *their*
computer.

For those of you who still complain about performance:

	http://www.compstop.com/sys/favorites/INDEX.HTM