Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!gatech!rutgers!bellcore!tness7!texbell!bigtex!james
From: james@bigtex.uucp (James Van Artsdalen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.microport
Subject: Re: Microport Announces....
Message-ID: <9111@bigtex.uucp>
Date: 12 Oct 88 13:41:51 GMT
References: <12950@mcdchg.UUCP> <444@l5comp.UUCP> <4811@b-tech.ann-arbor.mi.us>
Reply-To: james@bigtex.UUCP (James Van Artsdalen)
Organization: F.B.N. Software, Austin TX
Lines: 16

In article <4811@b-tech.ann-arbor.mi.us>, zeeff@b-tech.UUCP (Jon Zeeff) wrote:

> I find Green Hill's gcc to compile much quicker and produce code about 
> 20% faster (even on compress).  True, it doesn't work with some 
> programs - GNU stuff, news 2.11, ksh.  Now if I can only get GNU gcc 
> 1.29 to work on the '386.  

This seems to raise the interesting question of what Green Hill's C
*does* work with!  As for GNU C, I have v1.29 up and running from a
first stage compile.  Seems to work compiling sendmail 5.59 anyway.
Please post a comparison when possible.  I don't think GNU C compiles
any quicker than PCC (with the optimizer anyway), but it produces
vastly better code.
-- 
James R. Van Artsdalen   ...!uunet!utastro!bigtex!james   "Live Free or Die"
Home: 512-346-2444 Work: 338-8789        9505 Arboretum Blvd Austin TX 78759