From: "matthew p. conte" <spam AT somebody DOT else>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Is PGCC really worth it?
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 1998 07:35:27 -0500
Organization: little, if any
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <6d1350$pef@sjx-ixn11.ix.netcom.com>
References: <01bd4150$afde1c00$LocalHost AT default> <6d0sqp$b8f AT freenet-news DOT carleton DOT ca>
Reply-To: "matthew p. conte" <dont AT bother DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: alb-ny3-18.ix.netcom.com
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Precedence: bulk

Paul Derbyshire wrote in message <6d0sqp$b8f AT freenet-news DOT carleton DOT ca>...
>> I am writing an application that might benefit a lot form intensive
>> optimisation. Using -O3 (or -O2 with various switches) does seem to help,
>> but I'm thinking that Pentium opti's might be even better. Is it really
>> worth it to go PGCC, 'cause I heard that lots of stuff is "broken" in
PGCC,

[...]
>I would appreciate this information as well.

Then I'll post it here.  If you're writing your program for pentium class
processors and you need speed, go for pgcc.  I had trouble with the prior
release, but the stable 1.0.1 I've had zero problems with.  The prior
release would get caught in an infinite loop compiling nested switch()
statements, and sometimes it would just compile code incorrectly- it was
very frustrating.  But as I said, 1.0.1 is a dream.

My emulator's screen rendering code is very time-consuming, and using
pgcc's -O7 helps a hell of a lot.  I don't have specs, but I'd assume that
my emulator is almost twice as fast under pgcc at -mpentium -O7 than vanilla
gcc on -m486 and -O3.

I can't see any reason why you would *not* want to use pgcc.   All you have
to do is unzip and go.

Matt.