Daniel Kegel wrote: > So, I'm looking around for other reports of performance > regressions in gcc-4.0. So far, the only other ones I've > heard of are those reported in http://www.coyotegulch.com/reviews/gcc4/ > I'm tempted to have a student try reproducing and boiling down the POV-Ray > performance regession first. Has anyone else already done that? > I'd hate to repeat work.
I've found a couple of other performance regressions on various applications. Acovea is very good at narrowing the cause of regressions to specific GCC options. Should reports be made against 4.0, or against 4.1? Also, I'm not certain how to classify "options that don't work as expected" -- for example, -floop-optimize2, which is a pessimisim on many tests with 4.0.0. ..Scott
