--- Additional Comments From gschafer at zip dot com dot au 2005-01-05
00:19 ---
Here are some timimgs from my test runs. This is all done with:
--enable-languages=c
--disable-checking
make bootstrap
gcc-4.014:50
gcc-4.012.25- with STAGE1_CHECKING manually removed
On Jan 4, 2005, at 7:19 PM, gschafer at zip dot com dot au wrote:
- C only bootstrap times on GCC-4 have almost exactly doubled since
3.4.3
Well considering there is almost double the amount of code in 4.0.0
I would not doubt that. Also I can tell you that on ppc-darwin, we
are faster at
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2005-01-05
00:22 ---
Subject: Re: --disable-checking doesn't fully disable checking
On Jan 4, 2005, at 7:19 PM, gschafer at zip dot com dot au wrote:
- C only bootstrap times on GCC-4 have almost exactly doubled since
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-01-02
22:14 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
But users will definitely notice slower bootstraps, thus further
contributing to the perceived feeling that GCC is forever getting
slower.
This is an urban legend. Please do
--- Additional Comments From gschafer at zip dot com dot au 2005-01-02
22:27 ---
This is an urban legend.
I agree with the above comment, but you've completely missed my point.
With gcc-3.4.3, I can `make bootstrap' with --enable-languages=c and it takes
7:25. With gcc-4.0, I do the
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-02
02:16 ---
No this is not a bug, this was done on purpose to catch some bugs which we were
not catching before.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From gschafer at zip dot com dot au 2005-01-02
02:21 ---
Fairynuff.
As long as someone remembers to switch it off before release, because if not, it
will then clearly be a bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19223
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-02
02:23 ---
Why do you say it is a bug, because stage2 and stage3 are not compiled with
checking.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19223
--- Additional Comments From gschafer at zip dot com dot au 2005-01-02
02:30 ---
Because it currently makes my bootstraps slow as molasses. Yes, stage 2 and 3
are fine. But I thought released compilers were meant to have checking switched
off completely. If you release the compiler like
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-02
02:34 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
Because it currently makes my bootstraps slow as molasses. Yes, stage 2 and 3
are fine. But I thought released compilers were meant to have checking
switched
off completely. If
--- Additional Comments From gschafer at zip dot com dot au 2005-01-02
02:41 ---
Like I said, fairynuff.
But users will definitely notice slower bootstraps, thus further contributing to
the perceived feeling that GCC is forever getting slower. It will be a shame
IMHO.
If the extra
11 matches
Mail list logo
