From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Jul 7 10:07:11 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA21816 for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 10:07:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lestat.nas.nasa.gov (lestat.nas.nasa.gov [129.99.50.29]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA21804 for ; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 10:07:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lestat.nas.nasa.gov (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA08351; Sun, 7 Jul 1996 10:01:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199607071701.KAA08351@lestat.nas.nasa.gov> X-Authentication-Warning: lestat.nas.nasa.gov: Host localhost [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol To: Amancio Hasty Cc: grog@lemis.de (Greg Lehey), hackers@freebsd.org (FreeBSD Hackers) Subject: Re: gcc lies? Reply-To: Jason Thorpe From: Jason Thorpe Date: Sun, 07 Jul 1996 10:01:50 -0700 Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Sun, 07 Jul 1996 02:41:06 -0700 Amancio Hasty wrote: > Hmmm... 5.4 vs 14 seconds -- sounds to me like a good reason to > use gcc-1.42. > > I can see using gcc-1.42 for doing development once you get past the > stage of *gross* bugs for the final compilation phase switch > over to gcc-2.xxx. ...which potentially exposes one to be bitten by code generation differences during the final stages. Consistency is good. IMO, there is _never_ a good reason to use a grossly out-of-date compiler. -- save the ancient forests - http://www.bayarea.net/~thorpej/forest/ -- Jason R. Thorpe thorpej@nas.nasa.gov NASA Ames Research Center Home: 408.866.1912 NAS: M/S 258-6 Work: 415.604.0935 Moffett Field, CA 94035 Pager: 415.428.6939