GCC 3 or 4?
zmerch-lfs at 30below.com
Tue Feb 13 21:01:59 PST 2007
Rumor has it that Dan Nicholson may have mentioned these words:
>On 2/13/07, Peter B. Steiger <wyo_wl002 at bresnan.net> wrote:
> > Well, gcc 4 has been out for quite some time, and I'm sure all the
> > source packages have been updated so those patches are no longer needed.
> > But do I really need to change my preferred compiler? Are there any
> > benefits such as speed, reliability, stability, etc. with gcc 4 that are
> > lacking in gcc 3?
>A while back I was reading through the GCC archives and one of the
>developers said that one of the main goals is performance. In addition
>to making the compiler more robust, the goal is to compile
>faster/smaller binaries. So, presumably you could have better
>performance using the newer compiler. I'm not going to pretend to
>really know GCC. That's just something I read once.
It would be interesting to see the difference in compile times/binary sizes
between GCC 3 & 4 for... say... an LFS build. ;-)
Roger "Merch" Merchberger
Roger "Merch" Merchberger | "Profile, don't speculate."
SysAdmin, Iceberg Computers | Daniel J. Bernstein
zmerch at 30below.com |
More information about the lfs-support