From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 25 14:48:03 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 117A716A4CE; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 14:48:03 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50A9443D1F; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 14:48:02 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from [192.168.254.11] (junior-wifi.samsco.home [192.168.254.11]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j3PEqiIt004212; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 08:52:44 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <426D0252.5050805@samsco.org> Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 08:44:34 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050218 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kirill Ponomarew References: <3822.216.177.243.38.1114385370.localmail@webmail.dnswatch.com> <20050425000459.GA28667@xor.obsecurity.org> <6.2.1.2.0.20050424204611.072105a0@64.7.153.2> <20050425010242.GA44110@xor.obsecurity.org> <6.2.1.2.0.20050424210422.03d22990@64.7.153.2> <20050425014453.GA59981@xor.obsecurity.org> <426C6B1D.3040704@elischer.org> <20050425061459.GA33247@xor.obsecurity.org> <20050425062106.GB91852@voodoo.oberon.net> <426CF3DE.4000409@samsco.org> <20050425144108.GK91852@voodoo.oberon.net> In-Reply-To: <20050425144108.GK91852@voodoo.oberon.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on pooker.samsco.org cc: current@freebsd.org cc: Kris Kennaway cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org cc: Julian Elischer cc: Mike Tancsa Subject: Re: FreeBSD 6 is coming too fast X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 14:48:03 -0000 Kirill Ponomarew wrote: > On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 07:42:54AM -0600, Scott Long wrote: > >>>According to gcc-4.0 release notes, compilation speed for C++ was >>>dramatically increased, up to 25% IIRC. I think 4.0 is good >>>candidate for merging into HEAD. >>> >>>-Kirill >> >>Is this work that you plan on doing for us? What about the deprecated >>language constructs in 4.0? What about the lack of exposure that it's >>had outside of the FSF and Apple development circles? > > > No, I'm not going to do it because of lack of knowledge, there are > people who have more experience with it than me. > > -Kirill Well, as I said in another email, switching to GCC 4 just because of dubious "25% faster" (faster at what? compiling? resulting generated code? crashing?) claims in the changelog is not a terribly good reason =-) It seems that every time GCC claims to get "faster", our buildworld times increase by 10%. Maybe the generated code is better and faster, but it's no secret that gcc spends a lot more CPU cycles on code genreation and optimization than it did in the 2.x series. Note also that the GCC 4.0 changelog mentions that the -O0 flag is faster; that's wonderful, but has no practical value to real people. Scott