From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=DMARC_NONE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from Darkmere.psychozone (foo.stahl.nu [194.18.231.27]) by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98CB120AB420 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 14:47:40 -0500 (CDT) Received: from Darkmere.psychozone (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by Darkmere.psychozone (Postfix) with SMTP id 97E4222BE3 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 21:49:49 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 21:49:47 +0200 From: Spider To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GCC 3 Vs GCC 2 and some other stuff Message-Id: <20020408214947.1994365a.spider@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <1018243994.16315.0.camel@oak.uwyn.office> References: <20020408044612.4489e915.spider@gentoo.org> <1018243994.16315.0.camel@oak.uwyn.office> Organization: Chaotic X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.7.4 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=.,tw:t.htGXaQfU" Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.6 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Gentoo Linux developer list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Archives-Salt: ab0e168d-c6bb-4827-a71c-b2907c665228 X-Archives-Hash: 00774a814126a46a95535d73a49197b4 --=.,tw:t.htGXaQfU Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit sorry for missing that vital point, it was a comparsion of the compilation process, not the end results. Thats the issue when talking about the -speed- of a compiler, when comparing the -quality- on the other hand, then we are talking of how well the compiled code is performing. There are several benchmarks of this avaiable, just search the net and you shall find :) //Spider begin quote On 08 Apr 2002 07:33:13 +0200 Geert Bevin wrote: > What were you benchmarking since you never even mentioned that, the > compilation of the software or the resulting executable's performance. > The first one seems pretty useless to me, while the latter does make > sense. > -- begin happy99.exe This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature! See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information. end --=.,tw:t.htGXaQfU Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE8sfRdXNNftdcUD70RAjCYAJ9M4++lxs7YPvcdIKcYMYHf9vLpBQCfSoJp uf1x7dXin62XZeORgh1U0cc= =M/6y -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=.,tw:t.htGXaQfU--