why gcc-3.1?

Christophe Devine devine at chris.debian.org
Mon May 27 09:10:06 PDT 2002

Albert Wagner wrote:

> > the same machine, with BLFS systems build using gcc-2.95.3 and 3.1:
> > :> time bzip2 mozilla.tar (mozilla.tar beeing about 250MB)
> > [snip]
> > About 10% better performance from 1.) to 3.) !

> Assuming that this is more than just anecdotal, is a 10% savings
> in compile time worth the hassle. Surely, there is more.

Actually, the test above deals with execution time, not compile time.
It has already been said that gcc 3 compiles slower, but yields better
performance on integer and floating point operations than gcc 2.95.3.

Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list