From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-89337-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 27807 invoked by alias); 19 Jan 2004 15:49:50 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 27731 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2004 15:49:47 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO uniton.integrable-solutions.net) (62.212.99.186)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Jan 2004 15:49:48 -0000
Received: from uniton.integrable-solutions.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by uniton.integrable-solutions.net (8.12.3/8.12.3/SuSE Linux 0.6) with ESMTP id i0JFhA9b008997;
	Mon, 19 Jan 2004 16:43:10 +0100
Received: (from gdr@localhost)
	by uniton.integrable-solutions.net (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id i0JFh9DA008996;
	Mon, 19 Jan 2004 16:43:09 +0100
X-Authentication-Warning: uniton.integrable-solutions.net: gdr set sender to gdr@integrable-solutions.net using -f
To: Robert Dewar <dewar@gnat.com>
Cc: Nick Burrett <nick@dsvr.net>, Marc Espie <espie@quatramaran.ens.fr>,
   geoffk@apple.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: gcc 3.5 integration branch proposal
References: <90200277-4301-11D8-BDBD-000A95B1F520@apple.com>
	<20040110002526.GA13568@disaster.jaj.com>
	<82D6F34E-4306-11D8-BDBD-000A95B1F520@apple.com>
	<20040110154129.GA28152@disaster.jaj.com>
	<C97CAA9B-452F-11D8-94EA-000A95B1F520@apple.com>
	<1073935323.3458.42.camel@minax.codesourcery.com>
	<F9B61B7C-4558-11D8-939E-0030657EA24A@apple.com>
	<1073951351.3458.162.camel@minax.codesourcery.com>
	<20040119013113.044D74895@quatramaran.ens.fr>
	<m3ad4kzp8o.fsf@uniton.integrable-solutions.net>
	<400BB40B.4070101@dsvr.net> <400BE1D3.7010105@gnat.com>
From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net>
In-Reply-To: <400BE1D3.7010105@gnat.com>
Organization: Integrable Solutions
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 15:49:00 -0000
Message-ID: <m3ad4k6j1u.fsf@uniton.integrable-solutions.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg01292.txt.bz2

Robert Dewar <dewar@gnat.com> writes:

| So in the quote above, I would agree with the "slow machines", but
| not the "small RAM". I think it is just fine to trade off larger memory
| requirements against better code. Given a world in which people are used
| to the idea of a PC where 128 megabytes is marginal, using substantially
| more memory is not an issue.

I suggest you spend some time in the bugzilla database, triaging bugs
and explaining people who say that the compiler segfaulted -- when
compiling their programs, and you have determined that GCC was
consuming  huge memory  -- that they are marginal. 
Until then, I guess we're just going through an empty discussion. 

-- Gaby