Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!zdc!szdc!szdc-e!news From: "John S. Dyson" <dyson@indy.celebration.net> Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: gcc 2.7.2p vs. gcc 2.6.3 Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 13:00:20 -0500 Organization: AT&T Lines: 15 Message-ID: <31EFCD34.1FB0@indy.celebration.net> References: <4sl70i$301@bofh.noc.best.net> Reply-To: dyson@indy.celebration.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b5a (WinNT; I) Ron Echeverri wrote: > > I've installed the pgcc port and i've used it sparingly; while i know > that replacing the system binaries with new stuff is usually not a > good idea, i still wondered as to whether, since pgcc claims to be > optimized for the Pentium chip, would there be any significant > improvement if it were made the system default C compiler? > Be careful, it appears to coredump once in a while (much more often than the more stable versions.) I can compile the kernel with it and it works okay (it miscompiles a file or two sometimes :-)). It appears that on integer code, generally the improvement is fairly small. John