On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:35:41AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote: > On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 07:29:57PM +0100, Wilko Bulte wrote: > > - is GCC3 also better on Alpha as far as correctness of the generated > > code goes? Or is that what you mean by "bad optimised code" ? > > We shall see.
OK. 8-) > > - The gcc 2.95 compiler is quite a bit slower (it appears) on Alpha than > > on x86. Do you have any idea how gcc3 does in this respect? > > 3.1 will also be slower on the Alpha. It is really an issue of the code > generator. Generating x86 code on an Alpha is faster than generating > [native] Alpha code. The Alpha code generator is slow. It may be that > all 64 bit or RISC GCC code generation is slow -- we will see soon for > the sparc64. Thanks. So it is the code generator itself, I always thought it would be the optimiser that needs more time to do a decent job on a RISC. -- | / o / /_ _ [EMAIL PROTECTED] |/|/ / / /( (_) Bulte Arnhem, the Netherlands To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
