From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30323 invoked by alias); 24 Jun 2004 11:33:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 30295 invoked from network); 24 Jun 2004 11:33:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu) (128.122.140.213) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 24 Jun 2004 11:33:45 -0000 Received: by vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (4.1/1.34) id AA27656; Thu, 24 Jun 04 07:35:18 EDT Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 15:58:00 -0000 From: kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) Message-Id: <10406241135.AA27656@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> To: jsm@polyomino.org.uk Subject: Re: Patch to allow Ada to work with tree-ssa Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2004-06/txt/msg01941.txt.bz2 As illustrated by the growth of GCC itself. My bootstrap plus testsuite run times on constant hardware have gone from under one hour a bit over three years ago to over three hours now (and this is artificially low because of the temporary disabling of Ada). Much of this is the growth in GCC itself, but a significant part must be GCC slowing down. Well, sure, but constant hardware isn't a good model of what's out there. >From my perspective, bootstrap times have gone from nearly 24 hours when I first started working on GCC to 25 minutes recently and the latter includes Ada and Java, which were not in the 24 hour figure.