From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18643 invoked by alias); 25 Mar 2004 06:40:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 18616 invoked by alias); 25 Mar 2004 06:40:36 -0000 Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 06:40:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20040325064036.18615.qmail@sources.redhat.com> From: "paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20040312233606.14563.paulthomas2@wanadoo.fr> References: <20040312233606.14563.paulthomas2@wanadoo.fr> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/14563] octave built under Cygwin very slow X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-03/txt/msg03014.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr 2004-03-25 06:40 ------- Subject: Re: octave built under Cygwin very slow Danny, I am away from base right now and do not have access to any of the installations - Ben Diedrich can supply you with the version number for the "good" gcc; ie. that of the octave-forge binary distribution. For your information, Ben tells me that the slow build, with profiling, runs slightly more than three times more slowly than the fast build with profiling. Since the only significant difference in the profiles is the presence in the slow build of sjlj calls,..... j'accuse! Otherwise, the problem must lie in something outside the scope of the profiling. If "W" does not automatically get this, could you ensure that it is forwarded to him, please? Paul Thomas PS Thank you both for your rapid responses to this problem; it is something that has been perplexing us a lot. dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net wrote: >------- 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