On Mon, 2006-01-02 at 14:52 -0500, Stefan Teleman wrote:
> On 1/2/06, Erast Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > gcc-4.x branch has reworked optmizer for C++ and generates quite fast
> > objects.
>
> yup.
>
> > By any chance, do you have comparision links between Studio and
> > gcc-4.x ?
>
> Latest issue of Linux Magazine discusses gcc-4.x vs gcc-3.x. the
> results of the comparison are not spectacular, or much different than
> gcc 3.x.
That was C benchmarks, AFAIR
> i don't have links, but i have a test program, with results. because
> of the restrictions prohibiting the posting of benchmark results
> unless explicitly authorized by Sun, i can only post the output of
> this program here. if someone from Sun says it's ok to post the whole
> thing, i will gladly do so.
>
> Disclaimer: This Is Not A Benchmark. This is a silly test program.
>
> 1. SPARC:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]/programming/fibonacci.SPARC][01/02/2006
> 14:31:38][81]>> /usr/bin/time -p fibonacci.SunStudio10 -i 50 -f 36
> fibonacci.SunStudio10: calculated 50 fibonacci(36) in 20.960000 seconds
>
> real 20.99
> user 20.97
> sys 0.01
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]/programming/fibonacci.SPARC][01/02/2006
> 14:32:11][82]>> /usr/bin/time -p fibonacci.SunStudio11 -i 50 -f 36
> fibonacci.SunStudio11: calculated 50 fibonacci(36) in 20.800000 seconds
>
> real 20.82
> user 20.81
> sys 0.00
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]/programming/fibonacci.SPARC][01/02/2006
> 14:32:43][83]>> /usr/bin/time -p fibonacci.gcc342 -i 50 -f 36
> fibonacci.gcc342: calculated 50 fibonacci(36) in 52.680000 seconds
>
> real 52.71
> user 52.68
> sys 0.00
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]/programming/fibonacci.SPARC][01/02/2006 14:33:46][84]>>
>
> 2. X86:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]/src/steleman/fibonacci][01/02/2006 14:38:56][358]>>
> /usr/bin/time -p fibonacci.SunStudio10 -i 50 -f 36
> fibonacci.SunStudio10: calculated 50 fibonacci(36) in 9.450000 seconds
>
> real 9.46
> user 9.45
> sys 0.00
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]/src/steleman/fibonacci][01/02/2006 14:40:06][359]>>
> /usr/bin/time -p fibonacci.SunStudio11 -i 50 -f 36
> fibonacci.SunStudio11: calculated 50 fibonacci(36) in 9.320000 seconds
>
> real 9.32
> user 9.32
> sys 0.00
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]/src/steleman/fibonacci][01/02/2006 14:40:25][360]>>
> /usr/bin/time -p fibonacci.gcc342 -i 50 -f 36
> fibonacci.gcc342: calculated 50 fibonacci(36) in 10.120000 seconds
>
> real 10.12
> user 10.12
> sys 0.00
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]/src/steleman/fibonacci][01/02/2006 14:40:46][361]>>
>
> Now, if gcc 4.x has gone from 52.68 seconds to 20.96 seconds on SPARC,
> i would sure like to know.
Oh, gcc on sparc was always sucks... I doubt 4.x branch will change the
picture much. x86{,_64} is what majority of users cares much these days.
> > > In C++, GCC and SunStudio do not get along at all. And sometimes not
> > > in C either.
> >
> > You mean binary incompatability? Example please?
>
> 1. Try compling QT with GCC (either version above 3.x.x) and then try
> compiling and linking KDE against that build of QT, with SunStudio,
> and let us know how the linking goes. :-)
GNU ld had a bug related to wrappers which abuse weak symbols like
pthreads. Bug is fixed by Nexenta team and we now building/linking KDE
without any linking errors. btw, could you post linking error you've got
to verify that this is the same problem?
> 2. Try building libmad, libxine or liba52dec (which are written in C)
> with SunStudio, and let us know the results.
what should I expect?
> 3. Hint: The C++ Standard (ISO/IEC 14882:2003) does not contain a
> single instance of the following regular expressions:
> - mangling
> - virtual table
>
> --Stefan
>
> --
> Stefan Teleman
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> _______________________________________________
> opensolaris-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
