From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18266 invoked by alias); 31 Dec 2002 22:37:24 -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 18259 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2002 22:37:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO igw2.watson.ibm.com) (129.34.20.6) by 209.249.29.67 with SMTP; 31 Dec 2002 22:37:23 -0000 Received: from sp1n293en1.watson.ibm.com (sp1n293en1.watson.ibm.com [9.2.112.57]) by igw2.watson.ibm.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id gBVMb8334794; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 17:37:08 -0500 Received: from makai.watson.ibm.com (makai.watson.ibm.com [9.2.216.144]) by sp1n293en1.watson.ibm.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id gBVMb8T15718; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 17:37:08 -0500 Received: from watson.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by makai.watson.ibm.com (AIX4.3/8.9.3/8.9.3/09-18-2002) with ESMTP id RAA26788; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 17:37:08 -0500 Message-Id: <200212312237.RAA26788@makai.watson.ibm.com> To: Neil Booth cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: GCC still getting a lot slower In-Reply-To: Message from Neil Booth of "Tue, 31 Dec 2002 21:23:57 GMT." <20021231212357.GA22728@daikokuya.co.uk> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 20:22:00 -0000 From: David Edelsohn X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg01682.txt.bz2 >>>>> Neil Booth writes: Neil> It's only going to get fixed by refusing a release until it's as fast Neil> as the prior one. Otherwise it appears that people just don't care Neil> enough that each release is 30-50% slower than the previous one. I strongly believe that we need to have performance goals for GCC releases, not just release schedules. Previously when people have complained about performance, the response has been that it is too late in the release schedule. Well, we're now in Stage 1 of development for GCC 3.4, so it definitely cannot be too late. As a start, how about some comment about Daniel Berlin's Generational Copying Garbage Collector? Complaining about the problem and then ignoring developers who try to address the problem discourages further effort. It isn't perfect, but nothing in GCC is perfect. If it needs to be improved, the GCC developer community is invited to assist. Silence from the peanut gallery is abdication of moral authority to complain in the future. David