Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uflorida!mailer.cc.fsu.edu!sun13!sun8.scri.fsu.edu!nall
From: nall@sun8.scri.fsu.edu (John Nall)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: Compiler comparisons (object code)
Message-ID: <1650@sun13.scri.fsu.edu>
Date: 11 Dec 90 21:01:55 GMT
References: <1640@sun13.scri.fsu.edu> <28751@usc>
Sender: news@sun13.scri.fsu.edu
Organization: SCRI, Florida State University
Lines: 28

In article <28751@usc> kjh@pollux.usc.edu (Kenneth J. Hendrickson) writes:
>In article <1640@sun13.scri.fsu.edu> nall@sun8.scri.fsu.edu (John Nall) writes:
>>NAME                    (ACK)		(ANSI)		(BCC)		(GCC)
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> object size             smallest       bigger          bigger yet    biggest
>
>Can you please compare the speed of execution for these various
>binaries?  This would be very interesting information.

Actually, I did do some speed of execution tests, but found them to be
pretty much inconclusive.  The size of the object files seems to me to
be pretty much cut and dried, but execution speed, like beauty, tends to
be in the mind of the beholder.  I suspect that an example can be found
which will make each of them look good.  And of course we cannot ignore
that GCC and BCC (for me) are running under Minix-386, while ACK and ANSI
are running under Standard Minix 1.5.10.  

So I would not like to make any general statements concerning execution
speed of the object code produced by the four compilers.





--
John W. Nall		| Supercomputer Computations Research Institute
nall@sun8.scri.fsu.edu  | Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306
   WB4LOQ (why? I dunno....everyone else seems to be doing it.  _._)