lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: gcc 2.95 vs 3.21 performance
    Andi Kleen wrote:

    >If you want small and fast use lcc.
    >
    >Unfortunately it's not completely free (some weird license), doesn't
    >really support real inline assembly and generates rather bad code compared
    >to gcc.
    >
    >I'm still looking forward to Open Watcom (http://www.openwatcom.org) -
    >they are near self hosting on Linux. The inline assembly is very VC++ style
    >though; very different from gcc and worse you have to write it in
    >Intel syntax.
    >
    >Another alternative would be TenDRA, but it also has no inline assembly
    >and it's C understanding can be only described as "fascist".
    >
    >If you don't care about free software you could also use the Intel
    >compiler, which seems to be often faster in compile time than gcc now
    >and can already compile kernels.
    >
    There is also tcc (http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/tcc/)
    It claims to support gcc-like inline assembler, appears to be much
    smaller and faster than gcc. Plus it is GPL so the liscense isn't a
    problem either.
    Though, I am not really sure of the quality of code generated or of how
    mature it is.

    -Jeff


    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:32    [W:3.329 / U:1.180 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site