Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 23:31:58 +0200 To: "'pgcc AT delorie DOT com'" Subject: Re: K7 potentials Message-ID: <19990708233158.B24204@cerebro.laendle> Mail-Followup-To: "'pgcc AT delorie DOT com'" References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: ; from Man, Ronald De Ronald" on Thu, Jul 08, 1999 at 01:56:18PM +0200 X-Operating-System: Linux version 2.2.10 (root AT cerebro) (gcc driver version egcs-2.91.66 19990314 (egcs-1.1.2 release) executing gcc version 2.7.2.3) From: Marc Lehmann Reply-To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: pgcc AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Thu, Jul 08, 1999 at 01:56:18PM +0200, Man, Ronald De Ronald" wrote: > I think the reason is buggy optimizations in pgcc-1.1.3 when long longs no, the reason is plain slowness with -O2. I don't know wether this improved with the snapshots. > Some weeks ago I posted a tiny code fragment to this list that exhibited > this problem. Yes. > patch available for pgcc-1.1.3 to correct this bug? Or should I wait for > pgcc-2.95? I won't usually patch releases after they are done, unless they are severly broken (like 1.1.2). When I fix bugs this is done only in the snapshots, so you might either have a look at them or wait until pgcc-2.95. > (If I'm not mistaken, egcs-2.95 should be released today.) I doubt that ;) > Is the long long problem just so fundamental (for example caused > by a deep bug in egcs-1.1.2) that a minor pgcc update should not be > expected? No, but I have too little time to backport fixes to the release. Its only a single person doing all the hacking! -- -----==- | ----==-- _ | ---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +-- --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / pcg AT goof DOT com |e| -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+ The choice of a GNU generation | |