From: pavenis AT lanet DOT lv Message-ID: To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 15:25:47 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: gcc-2.95 19990714 prerelease) In-reply-to: <378E329D.7EF36A6E@inti.gov.ar> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On 15 Jul 99, at 16:12, salvador wrote: > Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > On Thu, 15 Jul 1999 pavenis AT lanet DOT lv wrote: > > > > > I also didn't enable HAIFA scheduler or changed away from default > > > alignments. Perhaps these things are for gcc-3.0 > > > > I would rather suggest to switch to 16-byte alignment now. It seems that > > gcc 2.96 already does that anyway, at least on Linux. > > Also in DOS, is confirmed. But is not good idea to align inside functions, not > even in Intel Pentium processors. Therefore I think that we should wait gcc-3.0 for that. I tested that with gcc-2.95 19990714 also in Linux 16-byte alignment is not used. > > It would be nice to have the next GCC and Binutils configured for 16-byte > > code alignment. > > Yes, but for entry points of functions. > Andris