RE: [ANN] gcc-2.95 1999-06-09 dev snapshot for Cygwin

RE: [ANN] gcc-2.95 1999-06-09 dev snapshot for Cygwin

[William Gacquer]

Hi! 
	gcc-2.95 does not perform very well compared to egcs1.1.2 on a win32
platform. Please have a look at this small benchmark collection :
 <<tench.zip>> Take care : it contains a pure win32 makefile!
	Any idea why gcc-2.95 is so slow?
	Regards,
	William

William Gacquer
Ubi Studios - Ubi Soft Entertainment

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Mumit Khan [SMTP:khan@xraylith.wisc.EDU]
> Sent:	Saturday, June 12, 1999 7:35 PM
> To:	William Gacquer
> Cc:	cygwin@sourceware.cygnus.com
> Subject:	RE: [ANN] gcc-2.95 1999-06-09 dev snapshot for Cygwin
> 
> On Fri, 11 Jun 1999, William Gacquer wrote:
> 
> > Hello!
> > 	I did some benchmarks in order to compare egcs 1.1.2 with gcc 2.95.
> > The last one is much slower than egcs 1.1.2 (except in one test). Why
> are
> > the binaries (with full optimisation) so slow with gcc 2.95?
> 
> I have no idea. It would be very useful if you can send a few testcases 
> to egcs@egcs.cygnus.com.
> 
> > On which egcs branch is it based?
> 
> GCC and EGCS are now merged, so egcs branch is irrelevant. The gcc-2.95
> branch is based mostly on the egcs mainline (not the egcs-1.1.x branch).
> 
> Regards,
> Mumit
> 

RE: [ANN] gcc-2.95 1999-06-09 dev snapshot for Cygwin

[William Gacquer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1156 bytes --]

Hi! 
	gcc-2.95 does not perform very well compared to egcs1.1.2 on a win32
platform. Please have a look at this small benchmark collection :
 <<tench.zip>> Take care : it contains a pure win32 makefile!
	Any idea why gcc-2.95 is so slow?
	Regards,
	William

William Gacquer
Ubi Studios - Ubi Soft Entertainment

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Mumit Khan [SMTP:khan@xraylith.wisc.EDU]
> Sent:	Saturday, June 12, 1999 7:35 PM
> To:	William Gacquer
> Cc:	cygwin@sourceware.cygnus.com
> Subject:	RE: [ANN] gcc-2.95 1999-06-09 dev snapshot for Cygwin
> 
> On Fri, 11 Jun 1999, William Gacquer wrote:
> 
> > Hello!
> > 	I did some benchmarks in order to compare egcs 1.1.2 with gcc 2.95.
> > The last one is much slower than egcs 1.1.2 (except in one test). Why
> are
> > the binaries (with full optimisation) so slow with gcc 2.95?
> 
> I have no idea. It would be very useful if you can send a few testcases 
> to egcs@egcs.cygnus.com.
> 
> > On which egcs branch is it based?
> 
> GCC and EGCS are now merged, so egcs branch is irrelevant. The gcc-2.95
> branch is based mostly on the egcs mainline (not the egcs-1.1.x branch).
> 
> Regards,
> Mumit
> 

[-- Attachment #2: tench.zip --]
[-- Type: application/zip, Size: 7223 bytes --]