UNIX admin wrote: >> Meh, generally speaking Solaris + GCC, and everything >> works nicely out >> of the box. >> > > That's a positive trend which begun only recently. However, it's still > plagued with problems: > > - GCC generates crappy, slow code > Sometimes yes, Sometimes no. Usually the ability of the programmer is a much greater contributer.
> - GCC allows one to write crappy, non-portable code (and doesn't even blink) > All compilers do this to some extent. GCC also lets you write nice portable code as well. > - GCC lacks any of the advanced optimization features of the > professional compilers (hp's, sgi's, Sun's) To an extent this maybe true, but don't blink as most of the time the difference is minimal. > - often, one doesn't even get past the braindead ./configure phase, so even > GCC doesn't help in that situation > ???? > Let's look at this Wine thing. I compiled it with GCC. Yes, it runs, and from > that little bit of playing I did with WinZip, it even seems to run decently > fast. > Wine is not a very good example as there are many variables that can impede performance. I think the compiler is the least of the problem. I have found that some apps run faster on wine then on Windows.... > However, had I been able to use the Sun Studio compilers, I would have been > able to go to town on that thing and make it *really fast* (short of hand > optimizing the source and assembler code) - automatic profiling, memory / > function defragmentation, elimination of dead / unused code, cross-function > optimizations, post-binary optimizations (yes, Sun Studio can do them!) - I > could have gained up to 80% faster binaries, and with something like Wine, > every CPU cycle counts! > There are some instances I have found where Sun Studio is slower than GCC. Can we remove the anti-gnu, anti-Linux rhetoric from this list, as it get us nowhere. Doug _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
