From owner-freebsd-hackers  Thu May 16 21:31:37 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id VAA09763
          for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 16 May 1996 21:31:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rocky.sri.MT.net (rocky.sri.MT.net [204.182.243.10])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA09757
          for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 16 May 1996 21:31:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.sri.MT.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA25807; Thu, 16 May 1996 22:31:29 -0600
Date: Thu, 16 May 1996 22:31:29 -0600
From: Nate Williams <nate@sri.MT.net>
Message-Id: <199605170431.WAA25807@rocky.sri.MT.net>
To: Peter Mutsaers <plm@simplex.nl>
Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: internal compiler error
In-Reply-To: <87loisb709.fsf@plm.simplex.nl>
References: <87ohnoclwp.fsf@totally-fudged-out-message-id>
	<87loisb709.fsf@plm.simplex.nl>
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>   >> causes an internal compiler error running gcc 2.7.2 on FreeBSD 2.2-stable.
> 
>   NW> Hmm, it works fine under -stable with 2.6.3.
> 
>   NW> #cheap shot on#
>   NW> This is one of the reasons why we stick w/older versions of GCC. :)
>   NW> #cheap shot off#
> 
> But the newer versions are quite a bit faster.

Huh?  I don't think so, as a matter of fact in same cases they are
slower, due to more memory use required for those with smaller memory
systems.

And, you certainly can't mean that the optimized code is faster, because
in some cases although it's faster it's wrong (ie; buggy).

Just because Linux uses 2.7.2 doesn't mean it doesn't have bugs in it.
(Far from it.)

Nate