Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 13 Feb 1997 14:43:13 -0800 (PST)
From:      asami@vader.cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
To:        jmb@freefall.freebsd.org
Cc:        hamby@aris.jpl.nasa.gov, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Sun Workshop compiler vs. GCC?
Message-ID:  <199702132243.OAA18747@vader.cs.berkeley.edu>
In-Reply-To: <199702132215.OAA12899@freefall.freebsd.org> (jmb@freefall.freebsd.org)

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
 * 	well, options make a huge difference on sun's compiler
 * 	(SC4.0 18 Oct 1995 C 4.0)
 * 
 * 	compare the numbers vs the options listed below
 * 
 * 	6009606.087651: -O5 -dalign -native -xautopar   <== strange
 * 	6051658.950850: -xO5 -dalign -native
 * 	3290361.568528: -xO5 -dalign
 * 	3274313.272930: -xO5

I'm not saying options don't make a huge difference, I know I can make
my compiler do totally stupid things (like if I take out -O :).

I don't know what the -native option does, but what I'm saying is that 
once the "simple" optimizations are covered, adding more and more
complex optimizations (as suggested by the "taking 3 times more to
compile" comment) is not going to give you much difference.

Of course, if the original Sun compiler was very brain damaged, you
could see a big improvement.  Maybe it was running in 386 mode without 
-native or something? :)

Satoshi



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199702132243.OAA18747>