From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13737 invoked by alias); 20 Jan 2004 15:08:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 13660 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2004 15:08:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO sadr.equallogic.com) (66.155.203.134) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 20 Jan 2004 15:08:48 -0000 Received: from sadr.equallogic.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by sadr.equallogic.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i0KF8l6a014290 for ; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 10:08:47 -0500 Received: from deneb.dev.equallogic.com (deneb [172.16.1.99]) by sadr.equallogic.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i0KF8lIg014285; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 10:08:47 -0500 Received: from PKONING.equallogic.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by deneb.dev.equallogic.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i0KF8k030974; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 10:08:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16397.17530.978000.639366@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 15:08:00 -0000 From: Paul Koning To: hahn@physics.mcmaster.ca Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: gcc 3.5 integration branch proposal References: <200401192246.52526.ebotcazou@libertysurf.fr> X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg01502.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Mark" == Mark Hahn writes: >> I think we can both agree that all is in the balance between code >> quality improvement and compilation speed degradation. Mark> the problem is that this discussion is being dominated by the Mark> sqeaky wheel phenomenon. who's likley to complain about Mark> compiler speed? people who somehow can't afford a beefy Mark> machine, and yet want to use gigantic UI frameworks or Mark> breathtaking template tricks. Mark> GCC still works VERY well for traditional Unix-style code, even Mark> on small machines, even with sane use of C++. I suppose that's probably still true. Our product is an embedded system, about half C++, half C. It's all pretty straightforward code, some templates but nothing wild, certainly nothing likw what you mentioned. It does takes quite a while (a couple of hours) to do a full build. We can do partial builds to deal with that, at some risk in getting things out of sync. What concerns me is that I see a general attitude that people who have machines more than a year or two old are obsolete and shouldn't complain when things get slow. That attitude, if allowed to take hold, will not hurt only those who do "breathtaking template tricks" -- it may well affect anyone who builds any substantial size project with GCC. Something else to keep in mind: some people use PC hosts. Others use other hosts -- Solaris boxes for example. It's easy for a US based PC hacker to say "just spend a few hundred dollars on a new PC". That approach will not go over well in shops that use a different host type, where host upgrades may be substantially more expensive. Note that switching hosts is only rarely an option. I know that there are companies out there that build PC-only software, whose minimal configuration requirements advance at least as rapidly as the hardware state of the art. Some of them even dominate the PC business. But it doesn't follow that the GCC project should follow that example. paul