From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeffrey A Law To: egcs@cygnus.com Subject: Re: egcs: A new compiler project to merge the existing GCC forks (fwd) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 04:27:02 -0000 Message-ID: In-reply-to: egcs: A new compiler project to merge the existing GCC forks (fwd) X-SW-Source: 1997-08/0129.html Message-ID: <19970819042702.e2owwM-wkvqvWM_3oB8QTF9gmiGZ4yKsbO1Ele9YAmY@z> HJ, can you work with this person to find out _why_ performance is suffering? If nobody takes the time to analyze these problems, then performance is never going to get significantly better. In message you write: > Forwarded message: > >From paehler@atlas.rc.m-kagaku.co.jp Mon Aug 18 19:09:18 1997 > Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 11:09:07 +0900 > From: Arno PAHLER > Message-Id: <199708190209.LAA04886@atlas.rc.m-kagaku.co.jp> > To: "H.J. Lu" > In-reply-to: "H.J. Lu"'s message of Sun, 17 Aug 1997 09:12:40 -0700 > Subject: egcs: A new compiler project to merge the existing GCC forks > > > I downloaded this a few days ago - compiles and runs without any > problems on a PentiumPro Linux 2.0.30 (Redhat 4.2) system - but: > > execution speed (floating point) of a test case (mdbench) compiled > with f2c+gcc is about 10% slower than using gcc 2.7.2.1 - it is > about the same or very slighly faster than g77 0.5.19.1 when using > g77 0.5.21 - when using single precision both f2c+gcc and g77 are > about 10-25% slower than their gcc 2.7.2.1/g77 0.5.19.1 counter- > parts. > > I had hoped that performance would improve rather than get worse - > is it so hard to optimize for x86? - I am back right now to the old > stuff, unless I get to hear a convincing reason why to switch. > > > Arno > > > -- > H.J. Lu (hjl@gnu.ai.mit.edu)