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:0.143 / U:3.140 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site