public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/14563] octave built under Cygwin very slow
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 22:58:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040324225813.8998.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040312233606.14563.paulthomas2@wanadoo.fr>
------- Additional Comments From dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net 2004-03-24 22:58 -------
I am a bit unclear what version of gcc was used for the "fast" precompiled
octave. Was it really gcc-3.2.3 or gcc-3.2-3 (the third cygwin update of gcc-
3.2.0)?
What does gcc -v say for the gcc that built the "fast" octave.
The cygwin gcc-3.2 distro's (dated about August 2002) had a local patch that
enabled Dwarf2 exceptions. This worked fine except when functions throwing
exceptions were used as callbacks by win32api functions. So the experimented
was terminated and the EH model was reverted to sjlj in later binary distro's
of gcc.
If this is really a difference between sjlj and Dwarf2, I think it is time to
revisit Dwarf2 support on windows targets.
Danny
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14563
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-24 22:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-03-12 23:36 [Bug c++/14563] New: " paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-03-13 7:24 ` [Bug c++/14563] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-03-13 8:06 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-03-14 20:33 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2004-03-24 9:52 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-03-24 15:57 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2004-03-24 16:38 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-03-24 17:03 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2004-03-24 21:07 ` Ben dot Diedrich at noaa dot gov
2004-03-24 22:58 ` dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net [this message]
2004-03-25 6:40 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-03-25 13:43 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2004-03-25 14:16 ` Ben dot Diedrich at noaa dot gov
2004-03-25 14:17 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-03-25 14:26 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-03-25 14:37 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2004-03-25 15:37 ` Ben dot Diedrich at noaa dot gov
2004-03-25 16:41 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-03-28 21:19 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-03-28 22:28 ` pkienzle at users dot sf dot net
2004-03-31 0:21 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-04-02 17:43 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-04-02 19:55 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2004-04-02 20:35 ` dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net
2004-04-02 20:41 ` pcarlini at suse dot de
2004-04-02 20:44 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2004-04-03 9:10 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-04-03 17:19 ` epanelelytha at kellertimo dot de
2004-04-03 17:54 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-04-03 18:00 ` epanelelytha at kellertimo dot de
2004-04-03 18:24 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-07-12 14:50 ` [Bug libstdc++/14563] new/delete much slower than malloc/free pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-07-12 19:21 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-07-12 20:55 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2004-07-13 4:17 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-07-28 2:50 ` ron_hylton at hotmail dot com
2004-07-28 3:57 ` ron_hylton at hotmail dot com
2004-07-28 6:03 ` [Bug target/14563] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-07-29 4:23 ` ron_hylton at hotmail dot com
2004-08-08 9:24 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-11-10 8:21 ` [Bug target/14563] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] new/delete much slower than malloc/free because of sjlj exceptions giovannibajo at libero dot it
2004-11-10 8:21 ` giovannibajo at libero dot it
2004-11-10 9:10 ` dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net
2004-11-10 12:46 ` [Bug target/14563] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-11-10 16:20 ` ron_hylton at hotmail dot com
2004-11-10 17:05 ` kjd at duda dot org
2004-11-13 11:03 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-11-14 17:03 ` ken dot duda at gmail dot com
2004-11-14 18:04 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr
2004-11-14 22:40 ` ken dot duda at gmail dot com
2005-05-12 14:53 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-05-12 14:54 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040324225813.8998.qmail@sources.redhat.com \
--to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).