--- Comment #41 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-01 11:08
---
Ok, let's say then comparing -O[23s] compile-times is unfair as we never
stated they are optimized for compile-time but they explicitly contain passes
that may usually _not_ help. -O1 may be a different story, but
--- Comment #40 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-31 22:22 ---
Comparing optimized build times *is* very, very fair as we add optimization
capabilities that help nothing for 99% of the code (cselim, bswap optimization,
cestore, etc.), and with a passes pipeline that unconditiona
--- Comment #39 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-31 21:36
---
4.0.4 4.1.2 4.2.4 4.3.3 4.4.0
-O0: 1.641.581.911.862.20
-O1: 4.124.60 10.145.315.43
-O2: 6.106.60 13.348.408.57
-Os: 4.825.38 10.926.54
--- Comment #38 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-04 16:46 ---
Closing 4.1 branch.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary
