From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Berlin To: Gerald Pfeifer Cc: Mark Mitchell , Subject: Re: C++ compile-time regressions (was: GCC 3.0.1 Status Report) Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 10:57:00 -0000 Message-id: <87y9pjsctn.fsf@cgsoftware.com> References: X-SW-Source: 2001-07/msg01425.html Gerald Pfeifer writes: > On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, Mark Mitchell wrote: >> I know we have already made some pretty significant bug-fixes, so I'm >> confident that the 3.0.1 release will be useful to current 3.0 users. >> It would be nice to address some of the lingering issues relative to >> GCC 2.95 that are preventing people from upgrading. > > Well, here I have to step up again, I'm afraid. If you look at > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2001-07/msg01376.html > you'll see that C++ projects heavily relying on STL apparently > simply cannot use GCC 3.0. > > GCC 2.95 GCC 3.0 > Compile time Binary size Compile time Binary Size > -O0 6:19 3915128 8:20 4159780 > -O1 4:20 4203480 11:40 4829732 > -O2 5:56 4209368 14:09 4862532 > -O3 5:47 4221464 32:04 6166052 > > This is not (only) an inlining problem it seems? We *still* haven't changed the inlining default. > > And, as shown by the table in my original message, the generated code > is also significantly slower, probably because of the ADDRESSOF issue > which still has not been resolved yet, AFAIK? > > Gerald > -- > Gerald "Jerry" pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at http://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/~pfeifer/ > > > > > > -- "I bought one of those little glass ball things with the snow in it. You know, you turn it upside down then you turn it back and it starts to snow. I bought one, except this has a snow plow that does it in rows. "-Steven Wright