From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Mar 17 17:52:17 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE7FB1065688
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Tue, 17 Mar 2009 17:52:17 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl
	[IPv6:2001:4070:101:2::1])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7483D8FC19
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Tue, 17 Mar 2009 17:52:15 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (localhost [IPv6:::1])
	by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n2HHq7mg058524;
	Tue, 17 Mar 2009 18:52:07 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Received: from localhost (wojtek@localhost)
	by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) with ESMTP id
	n2HHq7Vj058521; Tue, 17 Mar 2009 18:52:07 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 18:52:07 +0100 (CET)
From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
To: Geoff Fritz <gfritz@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20090317161547.GB6295@dev.null>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0903171850470.58509@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
References: <CF72636E-0A45-4970-BAF0-FDD53C8456B7@yahoo.fr>
	<alpine.BSF.2.00.0903171347550.57834@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
	<20090317140221.GA85698@dev.null>
	<alpine.BSF.2.00.0903171525310.58134@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
	<20090317161547.GB6295@dev.null>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Cc: freebsd general questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Cooking LLVM in FreeBSD 8
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 17:52:18 -0000

>
> I'm a big supporter of small, efficient binaries.  In fact, I'll often put
> "-Os" in my /etc/make.conf CFLAGS setting.  This only rarely improves raw
> speed over more agressive optimization flags, however.  I use it primarily

it do improves speed on DSP-like code that do repetitively the same on 
large data set, and the code is small.

> every case, even the stock gcc beat ccc.  To be honest, I didn't pay too
> much attention to the binary size, though I'm pretty sure both gcc variants
> beat ccc in that benchmark.

how much the difference was?