Bug#102193: gcc-3.0: compiled code with gcc 3.0 is slow and big

2002-05-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Anthony DeRobertis writes: On Friday, January 4, 2002, at 08:17 , Morten Brix Pedersen wrote: mbp:~$ g++ benchmark.cpp ; ls -l a.out ; time a.out ; g++-3.0 benchmark.cpp ; ls -l a.out ; time a.out Well, first, take . out of your path! I get: -rwxr-xr-x1 anthony anthony

Bug#102193: gcc-3.0: compiled code with gcc 3.0 is slow and big

2002-01-08 Thread Phil Edwards
On top of all the other reasons already mentioned, the memory expansion code for basic_string in 3.0 wasn't as good as it could be (and it wasn't strictly conforming in some cases). These problems have already been fixed for 3.1; there are some spiffy benchmarks in the libstdc++ mailing list

Bug#102193: gcc-3.0: compiled code with gcc 3.0 is slow and big

2002-01-08 Thread Matthias Klose
Phil Edwards writes: On top of all the other reasons already mentioned, the memory expansion code for basic_string in 3.0 wasn't as good as it could be (and it wasn't strictly conforming in some cases). These problems have already been fixed for 3.1; there are some spiffy benchmarks in the

Bug#102193: gcc-3.0: compiled code with gcc 3.0 is slow and big

2002-01-08 Thread Phil Edwards
On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 06:27:20PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: Phil Edwards writes: On top of all the other reasons already mentioned, the memory expansion code for basic_string in 3.0 wasn't as good as it could be (and it wasn't strictly conforming in some cases). These problems have

Bug#102193: gcc-3.0: compiled code with gcc 3.0 is slow and big

2002-01-08 Thread Matthias Klose
Phil Edwards writes: On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 06:27:20PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: how stable is this compared to 3.0.3? Is the ABI upward compatible, so that it could replace 3.0.3? Good point. This is something a lot of people get confused by. Including me, so get your grains of

Bug#102193: gcc-3.0: compiled code with gcc 3.0 is slow and big

2002-01-08 Thread Phil Edwards
On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 03:51:40AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: Phil Edwards writes: The library 3.0.95 snapshot is the 3.1 sources as of a few weeks ago, with the exception-handling bits tweaked to work with GCC 3.0. assume we want to get 3.0.95 into the Debian woody release, we have to

Re: Bug#102193: gcc-3.0: compiled code with gcc 3.0 is slow and big

2002-01-06 Thread Roman Zippel
Hi, Morten Brix Pedersen wrote: int main() { string test = IUHASISAHDNI; vectorstring vec; for (int i = 0; i = 50; ++i) { string newstr; test += NAWNASDKJNKNN; newstr = test; String assignments are threadsafe now with gcc-3.0, so that will have

Bug#102193: gcc-3.0: compiled code with gcc 3.0 is slow and big

2002-01-05 Thread Morten Brix Pedersen
Package: gcc-3.0 Version: 1:3.0.3-1 I don't know if it's valid for this bug report, but all code I have tried is slower in g++ 3, here's a simple example: (numbers first, code in the bottom) mbp:~$ g++ benchmark.cpp ; ls -l a.out ; time a.out ; g++-3.0 benchmark.cpp ; ls -l a.out ; time a.out

Re: Bug#102193: gcc-3.0: compiled code with gcc 3.0 is slow and big :-(

2001-06-25 Thread Christopher C. Chimelis
On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Matthias Klose wrote: funny report. what do you expect? please provide the relevant source as documented in /usr/share/doc/gcc-3.0/README.Bugs.gz. I'm Gabor Lenart from Hungary and we're developing a movie player software for Linux. We tried to compile and