Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1998 14:24:49 -0400 From: Harlan Stenn <Harlan.Stenn@pfcs.com> To: Harlan Stenn <Harlan.Stenn@pfcs.com> Cc: Alex <garbanzo@hooked.net>, Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>, Alexander Sanda <entropy@compufit.at>, wwoods@cybcon.com, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: gcc 2.8 Message-ID: <28885.903983089@brown.pfcs.com> In-Reply-To: Harlan Stenn's (Harlan.Stenn@pfcs.com) message dated Sat, 22 Aug 1998 22:33:46. <20089.903839626@brown.pfcs.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I just did another test of performance using TenDRA, comparing it to FreeBSD's "cc". Basically, the performance of the overall package was the same. There are some performance differences, depending upon what sort of operations are being done. For example, switch statement dispatching seems to be *much* slower with TenDRA (this includes things like Duff's device). Certain other operations (like string length scanning) are faster, and *maybe* byte moving is slower. I can't tell exactly where different other operations might be faster or slower, since the benchmark I used is pretty coarse-grained. If I can find a TenDRA function profiler, I might be able to learn more. And I suspect it was good for me to get this code base compiling under TenDRA without TenDRA complaining... H To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?28885.903983089>