From: Tom St Denis <stdenis AT compmore DOT net>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Support for higher end cpus
Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 03:07:47 GMT
Organization: Deja.com
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <92osa1$63a$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
References: <f_v36.53630$59 DOT 14770834 AT news3 DOT rdc1 DOT on DOT home DOT com> <3A4F2495 DOT AC43E413 AT softhome DOT net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.156.37.224
X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon Jan 01 03:07:47 2001 GMT
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.01; Windows 98)
X-Http-Proxy: 1.1 x54.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 24.156.37.224
X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDtomstdenis
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

In article <3A4F2495 DOT AC43E413 AT softhome DOT net>,
  djgpp AT delorie DOT com wrote:
> Tom ST Denis wrote:
> > I know (from my earlier post) that DJGPP can understand switches
such
> > as -march=k6 or -march=i686 but the code it produces doesn't seem
to be any
> > faster (substantially anyways) then -march=i486.  The output code
*is*
> > different just not improved.
>
> If you're using 2.95.x, then -march=i686 should use additional
conditional
> move instructions, which can make some difference.
>
> > Will there be any development for supporting the K7/PIII/PIV?  It
would make
> > DJGPP (and it's GCC derivatives such as CYGWIN) jump way ahead of
VC++ 6.0.
> > If GCC supported these new cpus I bet alot of people would be
happy!  I know
> > I would.
>
> Yes, sure, the upcoming GCC 3.0 will have completely rewritten ix86
backend,
> featuring MMX, PIII, Athlon support and better scheduling for Pentium
and PPro.
> Or you can try PGCC. But don't expect big wonders - ix86 is not
compiler friendly.

This sounds a little sarcastic "Yes, sure, ..." hehehe.  I am not
demanding anything from the group.  I just said it would be cool if...

:-)

Tom


Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/