From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27161 invoked by alias); 19 Jan 2004 08:38:15 -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 27151 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2004 08:38:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO uniton.integrable-solutions.net) (62.212.99.186) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Jan 2004 08:38:13 -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 i0J8Vi9b007436; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 09:31:44 +0100 Received: (from gdr@localhost) by uniton.integrable-solutions.net (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id i0J8Vh7C007435; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 09:31:43 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: uniton.integrable-solutions.net: gdr set sender to gdr@integrable-solutions.net using -f To: Steven Bosscher Cc: "Giovanni Bajo" , "Marc Espie" , Subject: Re: gcc 3.5 integration branch proposal References: <90200277-4301-11D8-BDBD-000A95B1F520@apple.com> <24a301c3de45$ed34dc40$34b82997@bagio> <200401190910.34723.stevenb@suse.de> From: Gabriel Dos Reis In-Reply-To: <200401190910.34723.stevenb@suse.de> Organization: Integrable Solutions Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 08:38:00 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg01248.txt.bz2 Steven Bosscher writes: | On Monday 19 January 2004 05:39, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: | > "Giovanni Bajo" writes: | > | Testcases would help. We seriously do care about all the compile-time | > | regressions we have in bugzilla, but we have just a few of | > | them. People should really file bugreports about it. | > | > Strongly seconded. In private, I've told Marc that the more people | > complain (i.e. filling reports) about their being bitten by | > compile-time perforamnce, the more it is likely that GCC developers | > will eventually care about it. | | Perhaps everyone has missed some of the work Honza has done this | month to kill some of the most tough bottlenecks, and perhaps | nobody has seen the numbers posted by Gerald that for his C++ | test case we _are_ much faster than 3.3 and 3.2? Don't be fooled. -- Gaby