From: Vic <tudor AT cam DOT org>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: binutils 2.8.1 performance = slow
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 17:27:09 -0500
Organization: Communications Accessibles Montreal, Quebec Canada
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <347CA23D.5E3C@cam.org>
References: <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 971126132246 DOT 960H-100000 AT is> <347C86AC DOT 7AAC AT seanet DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dynppp-199.hip.cam.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Precedence: bulk

Alan M. Doerhoefer wrote:
> Indeed, since I only compared the performance using one (large)
> program, I don't think that's a very good measure of the overall
> speed of 2.8.1. I was surprised enough to inquire if anyone else
> had seen this sort of thing, but I will now study this in depth
> and report back.
Yes, me. A while back Thomas Djafari posted a program for comparing
Watcom and DJGPP. With pentium optimisations (-O6 -mpentium
-funroll-loops -ffast-math -fomit-frame-pointer) on a P133 16 MB RAM.
Same slowdown with Binutils 2.8.1
-- 
--> http://www.cam.org/~tudor <--