On 6/6/23 02:09, Dave Blanchard wrote:
On Tue, 6 Jun 2023 01:59:42 +0200
Gabriel Ravier <gabrav...@gmail.com> wrote:
[nothing of value]
If this guy's threads are such a terrible waste of your time, how about
employing your email client's filters to ignore his posts (and mine too) and
fuck off?
Now YOU'RE wasting everyone's time, as your type is so skilled at doing, refocusing an
important discussion to generic whining about "muh feelings", instead of the
real issue at hand here: GCC's optimizer is TERRIBLE!
Well, evidently you have a completely different understanding of what
the "important discussion" here is. I've simply been trying to respond
to your emails in a manner I thought appropriate: I didn't think you
were sending mails with the expectation that it is apparently
unacceptable for me to respond to them, especially when they contain
multiple explicit direct questions.
I for one appreciate this guy's posts, as this issue might have never been
called to my attention otherwise; certainly not if this were relegated to the
dusty corner of some bug list somewhere. I've now reverted to a much older
version of GCC which will hopefully waste much fewer of my old computer's CPU
cycles, while also (provably) not constantly breaking my system with all the
added warnings and errors every release.
I did not think Poe's law would become applicable to so many discussions
on this mailing list, but here I am... I guess that leaves me with only
one question: are you actually serious in your claim that this "much
older version of GCC" will produce faster code than a recent one ?
Dave
