From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11745 invoked by alias); 21 Apr 2010 18:32:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 11678 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Apr 2010 18:32:12 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SARE_MILLIONSOF X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-103-wednesday.nerim.net (HELO kraid.nerim.net) (62.4.16.103) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 18:32:06 +0000 Received: from hector.lesours (ours.starynkevitch.net [213.41.244.95]) by kraid.nerim.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8EF5CF257; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 20:32:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from glinka.lesours ([192.168.0.1]) by hector.lesours with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1O4eiS-0005jE-0z; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 20:32:04 +0200 Message-ID: <4BCF44A5.2090105@starynkevitch.net> Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 18:37:00 -0000 From: Basile Starynkevitch User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100411) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Steven Bosscher CC: Robert Dewar , Vladimir Makarov , Duncan Sands , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Some benchmark comparison of gcc4.5 and dragonegg (was dragonegg in FSF gcc?) References: <20100409163655.GA25781@bromo.med.uc.edu> <4BBF5B7C.7060801@starynkevitch.net> <4BC07718.3060400@free.fr> <4BC1D647.60902@free.fr> <4BCF2D93.1050709@redhat.com> <4BCF2E50.2050309@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-04/txt/msg00479.txt.bz2 Steven Bosscher wrote: > On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 6:56 PM, Robert Dewar wrote: >> Actually for my taste, you have to get a MUCH bigger factor in compile >> time before you can call yourself a fast compiler (Realia COBOL by >> comparison compiles millions of lines a minute of code on current >> PC's, using just one core). > > Heh, you always bring up the Realia compiler when there's a compile > time discussion. Must have been a really impressive piece of work, > that it was so fast :-) Another example of a compiler which compiles quickly but produces slow code is tinycc http://www.tinycc.org/ http://repo.or.cz/w/tinycc.git (the program is called tcc) In my very small & rusty experience, it did happen that tcc used to generate incorrect machine code, at least some old version of tcc did compile some old version of MELT generated code incorrectly on x86-64 [the tcc-generated *.so crashed, while the *.so generated by GCC from same source did run correctly]. Now, it is indeed true that TCC probably evolved since (& MELT also), and I don't know where and how to get the newest TCC source (is the "git clone git://repo.or.cz/tinycc.git" command enough?, the version number seems to be 0.9.25 since more than a year...). A useless measure of compile time (within the MELT branch, subdirectory gcc of the build directory. warmelt-first.1.c is a generated C file of 96KLOC) % time gcc-4.5 -g -DIN_GCC -DHAVE_CONFIG_H \ -I melt-private-build-include -I. -fPIC -c -o warmelt-first.1.pic.o warmelt-first.1.c gcc-4.5 -g -DIN_GCC -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I melt-private-build-include -I. -fPIC - 10.29s user 0.41s system 100% cpu 10.695 total % time tcc -g -DIN_GCC -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I melt-private-build-include -I. -fPIC -c -o warmelt-first.1.pic.o warmelt-first.1.c tcc -g -DIN_GCC -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I melt-private-build-include -I. -fPIC -c -o 0.63s user 0.03s system 99% cpu 0.660 total The current tcc is not really usable for me, I am not able to do a melt bootstrap (that is to compile warmelt-*.0.c into MELT modules warmelt*0.so, use them to generate warmelt*1.c, compile them to warmelt*1.so, and use them to generate warmelt*2.c). This MELT bootstrap is routinely done with GCC 4.4 & GCC 4.5 (the warmelt*1.c is generated but does not work ok). Regards. PS. About GCC MELT see http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/MiddleEndLispTranslator -- Basile STARYNKEVITCH http://starynkevitch.net/Basile/ email: basilestarynkevitchnet mobile: +33 6 8501 2359 8, rue de la Faiencerie, 92340 Bourg La Reine, France *** opinions {are only mines, sont seulement les miennes} ***