On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 03:06:44PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote: >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?
Why do you assume that this is not already the case? I use i686-pc-cygwin as the target for everything that I build and I use a i686-pc-cygwin-gcc cross compiler. cgf -- 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/
