On Feb 21, 2010, at 07:13, Richard Guenther wrote: > The present discussion is about defaulting to at least 486 when not > configured for i386-linux. That sounds entirely reasonable to me.
I fully agree with the "at least 486" part. However, if we only change the default once every 20 years, it seems we should bump it up more than to just 486... People who compile GCC from sources, mostly use it to compile other code from source for their own use. The only reason to by default generate code for an older chip than the one on the host, is to distribute binaries. Why would a GNU compiler by default give up performance and numerical stability to facilitate binary distribution? Basically, GCC has to compete with other compilers, such as those from Microsoft and Intel. When GCC arbitrarily decides to tie one hand behind its back, so that code by default targets a 25-year-old chip, it is no surprise it comes out looking bad. -Geert
