From owner-freebsd-hackers  Thu Feb 13 14:43:27 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id OAA14797
          for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 13 Feb 1997 14:43:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from vader.cs.berkeley.edu (vader.CS.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.38.234])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA14784
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Thu, 13 Feb 1997 14:43:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from asami@localhost) by vader.cs.berkeley.edu (8.8.4/8.7.3) id OAA18747; Thu, 13 Feb 1997 14:43:13 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 14:43:13 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199702132243.OAA18747@vader.cs.berkeley.edu>
To: jmb@freefall.freebsd.org
CC: hamby@aris.jpl.nasa.gov, hackers@freebsd.org
In-reply-to: <199702132215.OAA12899@freefall.freebsd.org> (jmb@freefall.freebsd.org)
Subject: Re: Sun Workshop compiler vs. GCC?
From: asami@vader.cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

 * 	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