-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 According to Dave Korn on 1/27/2006 9:34 AM: > Nope, don't worry about it, that's a bit of a red-herring. By default, the > code gcc generates is good for everything from '486 > up. The instruction scheduling and choice of which instructions to use may > be tuned to be optimal for a 686 and so may be > less-than-optimal on a '586, but there should not be any actual > backward-compatibility issues.
Speaking of which, should the next release of cygwin gcc be configured to generate code tuned for 686, rather than penalizing most modern CPUs with 386-compatible but slower code sequences? - -- Life is short - so eat dessert first! Eric Blake [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Cygwin) Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFD2pl084KuGfSFAYARAv9xAJwKnFa+ozzb2o3i38va0yCgWPtz8gCfYDgL WgTpPBIZaP3NFORDtVb4Nyg= =P/nR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
