lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: gcc 2.95 vs 3.21 performance
Date
In article <3E4045D1.4010704@rogers.com>,
Jeff Muizelaar <muizelaar@rogers.com> wrote:
>
>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.

tcc is interesting. The code generation is pretty simplistic (read:
trivially horrible for most things), but it sure is fast and small. And
judging by the changelog, Fabrice is trying to compile the kernel with
it.

For a lot of problems, small-and-fast is good. Hell, some of the things
I'd personally find interesting don't have any code generation part at
all (static analysis of annotated source-code - stanford checker on the
cheap). And development doesn't always need good code generation (right
now some people use "gcc -O0" for that, because anything else hurts too
much. Now, the code from tcc will probably look more like "-O-1", but
at least you can test out things _quickly_).

Linus
-
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:0.127 / U:2.240 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site