[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: gcc 2.95 vs 3.21 performance
Jeff Muizelaar writes: 

> 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 ( -
>> 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 (
> 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

wow, looks like some teenage kid like me made it...
its a 170 kb gzipped tar!
nice for a C compiler...But i'm not sure if it could compile half of the
linux kernel successfully...
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:32    [W:0.099 / U:7.556 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site