On Tue, 6 Jun 2023, 01:07 Dave Blanchard, <d...@killthe.net> 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! >
Why are you still here then? Other compilers are available. > > 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. > Great, so there's no reason for you to follow the development of current gcc. Toddle off somewhere else.
