Mindaugas,
I don't have test this version. Have you tried to -Os and linker with -s?
It's like I get better results in size with 3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Optimize-Options.html
What parameters are you using for compiler speedtest?
Xavi
Mindaugas Kavaliauskas escribió:
Hi,
I see a few new features under GCC: hbvmall, I see a new discussions
about HB_STRICT_ALIGNMENT, etc. So, I decided to do some new speed tests
BCC vs GCC. BCC was winning long time ago (before dlmalloc).
Test conditions:
- SVN 11150
- WinXP SP2
- default build + -DHB_FM_STATISTICS_OFF
- speedtest.exe
BCC MinGW 4.4.0
Test execution 69.58 / 73.90 57.77 / 59.98
speedtst.exe size 622592 1090648 (903680 stripped)
Harbour build 4min 47sec 29min 15sec
So, GCC is 17% faster execution, 45% larger executable, 6.11 times
longer compilation.
The question is: why executable size is significantly larger? Huge
number of inlined functions or ...?
For Harbour development, it would be nice to have a better compile time
also. Half an hour to check if typo is fixed is a long time.
Regards,
Mindaugas
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
