compiling/compiler comparison

2006-12-28 Thread deeptech71
Compiling. Let's say that the project is debugged and working. The 
performance is of the highest priority.


Does the executable code quality depend only on the compiler? Comparison 
between native and cross-compiling?
Is it worth porting the project to GGC if you can download specifically 
optimized .asm code for GCC? What IDEs are currently available that use GCC?


Finally, if someone knows wether microsoft's or GNU's compiler is better 
for generating faster windows code, please?

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: compiling/compiler comparison

2006-12-28 Thread Ivan Voras
Your questions don't belong in this list because they don't have
anything to do with FreeBSD but here goes...

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Does the executable code quality depend only on the compiler? Comparison
 between native and cross-compiling?

In general, the choice of algorithm is of the highest importance. Seek
compiler optimizations only if you already have adequate algorithms.

The results of native and cross-compiling should be the same, per
definition of cross-compiling.

 Is it worth porting the project to GGC if you can download specifically
 optimized .asm code for GCC?

Yes, in general, but you must test it before and afterwards.

 What IDEs are currently available that use
 GCC?

Depending of what you think an IDE is, either none or a gazillion.
There's nothing like what's available for commercial platforms, but
there are a lot of decent editors that can call compilers. If you're
doing windows programming with gcc, see for example Dev-cpp.

 Finally, if someone knows whether microsoft's or GNU's compiler is better
 for generating faster windows code, please?

Microsoft's, definitely. If you're really after extracting
water-out-of-stone performance, Intel's are even better.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature