Re: middle-end/3973: GCC fails to bootstrap with 80+160MB memory / optimization

[Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>]

The following reply was made to PR middle-end/3973; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>
To: Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at>
Cc: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, <gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: middle-end/3973: GCC fails to bootstrap with 80+160MB memory /
 optimization
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 18:06:34 -0600 (CST)

 > > I would not even pretend I would disagree with you on the matter of
 > > compile time and memory consumption, but every time I brought this up
 > > (even with numbers from our own project), nothing really happens.
 > 
 > Have you created high-priority PRs for such projects? That might be
 > better than this PR...
 
 The project is 200k lines of template heavy C++. Not exactly a smaller 
 testcase. I occasionally filed reports for cases where compile time 
 exploded (and these were fixed mostly), but the general trend of 3.3 being 
 (more than) twice as slow as 2.95 for example is unchecked, and I don't 
 have a simple testcase for that, unfortunately.
 
 In fact, there are testcases already around: the automatic SPEC testers 
 also log daily compile times for fixed programs. Every once in a while 
 someone notices that something gets slower and sometimes even can point to 
 a particular patch, but the general trend is not broken by that.
 
 
 > > So what should we do?
 > 
 > ...which I agree to close.
 
 I'll do it, but only with a certain amount of reluctance :-(
 
 W.
 
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Wolfgang Bangerth             email:            bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu
                               www: http://www.ticam.utexas.edu/~bangerth/