From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23341 invoked by alias); 21 Nov 2004 00:24:26 -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 23309 invoked from network); 21 Nov 2004 00:24:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO relay03.pair.com) (209.68.5.17) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 21 Nov 2004 00:24:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 86954 invoked from network); 21 Nov 2004 00:24:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.123.1?) (unknown) by unknown with SMTP; 21 Nov 2004 00:24:21 -0000 X-pair-Authenticated: 24.126.73.164 Message-ID: <419FD23A.7070204@kegel.com> Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 06:49:00 -0000 From: Dan Kegel User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040913 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: GCC Mailing List Subject: Re: compiler memory use optimization Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-11/txt/msg00721.txt.bz2 Joe Buck wrote: > Giovanni Bajo wrote: >> The good news is that 3.4 is much better [than 3.3] on many testcases. >> (Un)luckily, it is also much more ISO/ANSI C++ standard compliant, so >> upgrading from 3.3 to 3.4 for a large C++ applications could be non-trivial. > > This is mainly the case for those who have never used compilers other than > g++, and who learn the language by throwing code at the compiler and > seeing what works. The scars on my back say large C++ applications by even very good programmers can be a lot of work to port from gcc-3.3 to gcc-3.4. Or from gcc-2.95.3 to gcc-3.3. Or from 32 bit to 64 bit. Or from gcc-3.4 to icc-8.1. Any big change brings its own set of problems... - Dan -- Trying to get a job as a c++ developer? See http://kegel.com/academy/getting-hired.html