Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2000 10:22:12 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: dennis51 AT my-deja DOT com
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: 203 much slower than 202
In-Reply-To: <870fll$3ot$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000130101851.17273W-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: dj-admin AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Sun, 30 Jan 2000 dennis51 AT my-deja DOT com wrote:

> Yes, the slow part is CC1PLUS.

This *is* expected.

> And, no, the program does not run any faster.
> It is about 0.5% larger and about 1% slower.

I suggest to experiment with various individual optimizations, like the FAQ 
advises in section 14.2.

> Well, if one of my programs suddenly went from 23 seconds
> to 32 seconds you can be sure I would investigate it, and fix it.

I don't think there's a fix for this one, since the optimzations 
performed by GCC are now so much more elaborate.  But feel free to report 
this to GCC maintainers.