> > Many of the improvements in c++ code generation were as a result of > > tree-ssa, you only get with 4.x.
On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 01:19:24PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote: > It is however a bigger step change, and a correspondingly bigger risk. > There are arguments in favour of not running with the bleeding edge when what > you want is simply a stable production compiler that will build your own > particular codebase. I would agree under some circumstances, and there's an argument that if you have a codebase that works well with 2.95.3, you might as well stick with it. But 4.1.x has been in production use for a while now, and is used to build entire distributions of thousands of programs. There's a risk of switching compilers at all, but if it is to be done, it's not like 3.3.x is going to be more stable than 4.1.2. Now when 4.2.0 is out, *that* will be bleeding edge.
