From: "Johan Venter" <jventer AT writeme DOT com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
References: <Pine DOT A41 DOT 4 DOT 05 DOT 9908141643570 DOT 31986-100000 AT ieva01 DOT lanet DOT lv>
Subject: Re: gcc-2.95 and binutils-2.9
Lines: 25
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Message-ID: <R0Jt3.6586$X4.13836@newsfeeds.bigpond.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 1999 11:34:42 +1000
NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.40.84.151
X-Trace: newsfeeds.bigpond.com 934763697 203.40.84.151 (Mon, 16 Aug 1999 10:34:57 EST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 10:34:57 EST
Organization: Telstra BigPond Internet Services (http://www.bigpond.com)
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Andris Pavenis <pavenis AT lanet DOT lv> wrote in message
news:Pine DOT A41 DOT 4 DOT 05 DOT 9908141643570 DOT 31986-100000 AT ieva01 DOT lanet DOT lv...
> > 1. When using gcc-2.95 (binaries downloaded from simtelnet), there is a
> > considerable compilation slow down when compiling both c and c++
programs.
>
> More optimizations.
>
> > It seem to take ages to execute something called "collect2".
>
> collect2 is called only to link executatble and it should not take much
> time to execute itself.

Yes, I did some more experiments yesterday after I posted that by seperating
linking/compiling and compiling some large libraries. It seems that gcc-2.95
is faster when it comes to compiling and produces faster programs after
linking due to the increased optimization.

--
Johan Venter
ICQ 3643877
surf.to/djgppig