From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Feb 28 11:21:44 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id LAA04296 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 28 Feb 1996 11:21:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from ki.net (root@ki.net [142.77.249.8]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA04278 for ; Wed, 28 Feb 1996 11:21:31 -0800 (PST) Received: (from scrappy@localhost) by ki.net (8.7.3/8.7.3) id OAA14082; Wed, 28 Feb 1996 14:20:27 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 14:20:26 -0500 (EST) From: "Marc G. Fournier" To: "Amancio Hasty Jr." cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Pentium gcc (pgcc) in ports... In-Reply-To: <199602280648.WAA00377@rah.star-gate.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Tue, 27 Feb 1996, Amancio Hasty Jr. wrote: > Well, the general consesus is that someone drop the ball and in some > programs like mpeg_play we lost oh about 30% performace from > a previous pgcc version. > Okay...that helps a little bit...but, were I to compare straight 2.7.2 against pgcc...has pgcc been patched up enough that optimizations work as you would hope, and would the current pgcc's performance be better then stock-2.7.2? Or is there a lose in performance there too? Would I be safe with replacing cc with pgcc? Marc G. Fournier | POP Mail Telnet Acct DNS Hosting System | WWW Services Database Services | Knowledge, Administrator | | Information and scrappy@ki.net | WWW: http://www.ki.net | Communications, Inc