I see it as yet another environmental dependency. If gcc 3.3 solves these (?) problems, how are you going to make the Fink version switch? If you want to go to the effort to optimize for each OS version, fine, but I think that's a waste of your time.
The benchmarks you refer to are not for 0.6.1, but for 0.5.0. This new version does not have near as much (if any) penalty for using gcc 3.1. So why use it? DaR On 3/23/03 10:57 AM, "Jorge Acereda Maci�" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sunday, March 23, 2003, at 06:27 PM, Dennis Ruffer wrote: > >> On 3/22/03 11:22 AM, "Jorge Acereda Maci�" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> CC=gcc2 >> >> Not required any longer and I recommend using the default gcc now. >> Right >> now, with 10.2.4, gcc is based on 3.1, but 3.3 is coming soon and I am >> hoping to get time to test it rsn. > > Why do you recommend gcc3? > > David posted results showing better times for gcc2: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg00029.html > > I also saw gcc3 do stupid things on ARM for my forth, I just don't > trust it (didn't check under PPC nor the Apple version). Anton and > Bernd reported the problem to the gcc bug tracking system, but I still > see it marked as open. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
