From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Fred Fish To: egcs@cygnus.com Subject: Re: Building of generated parser files Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 19:23:08 -0000 Message-id: <199708211936.MAA02027@ninemoons.com> In-reply-to: 199708211923.PAA00539@tiktok.cygnus.com X-SW-Source: 1997-08/0263.html > I > would also go as to remove the generated parser files and info, and > generate them in the object directory as part of the build process. What about the two files that can be regenerated by gperf? -Fred From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oleg Krivosheev To: egcs@cygnus.com Subject: Re: mdbench for g77 & f2c+gcc Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 19:23:08 -0000 Message-ID: <199708211936.MAA02027@ninemoons.com> In-reply-to: rzqen7ntmi6.fsf@djlvig.dl.ac.uk X-SW-Source: 1997-08/0264.html Message-ID: <19970821192308.MAUFPbwNm6oM5YxF8HLeo5FFxAuzPBOuc7xqTx4yHzU@z> Hi, On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Dave Love wrote: > Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 19:32:49 +0100 > From: Dave Love > To: egcs@cygnus.COM > Subject: Re: mdbench for g77 & f2c+gcc > > On x86 -fforce-addr often has a significant effect on fortran in > either direction, doubtless differently in different parts of the > code. i'll check... > f2c-compiled code is normally significantly better with gcc if you use > `-a' (basically equivalent to g77's default -fautomatic), as is always > appropriate for standard-conforming code. Failure to use -a has given > f2c and C-as-UNCOL a worse press than warranted. oops! my bug... just tried f2c -a & egcs gcc. Time is down from ~25 sec to 18.94 sec. Still ~15% worse that g77. > Beware that old Fortran benchmarks often have coding problems which > g77 will show up, either through straight standard-non-conformance or > portability problems such as not declaring EXTERNALs; mdbnch did the > latter IIRC, though it just elicits a warning from g77. hmm... it's quite clean now - g77/f2c/ftncheck emits just few warning about declared but unused variables. > [One important x86-performance-related thing that backend experts > might like to look at sometime is why the backend allegedly doesn't > (or didn't early this year) generate optimal 586 code for the level-1 > BLAS (O(n) floating point linear algebra), which people have been > feeling the need to code in assembler. I can provide references for > that at some stage if anyone is interested.] please, send it to me in private mail > Gratifying interest in Fortran :-). ;) OK