Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-ncis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ucbvax!tolerant.UUCP!news
From: news@tolerant.UUCP (The Daily Fishwrap)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.microport
Subject: Submission for comp-unix-microport
Message-ID: <8901060742.AA21262@handel.TOLERANT>
Date: 6 Jan 89 07:42:54 GMT
Sender: uuclerk@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Lines: 28

Path: tolerant!voder!apple!rutgers!bellcore!texbell!ssbn!bill
From: bill@ssbn.WLK.COM (Bill Kennedy)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.microport
Subject: Green Hills 386 compiler
Keywords: gcc shared libraries
Message-ID: <293@ssbn.WLK.COM>
Date: 27 Dec 88 19:30:02 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: W.L. Kennedy Jr. & Associates, Pipe Creek, TX
Lines: 17

s the subject suggests I'm trying to tiptoe into the new compiler.  Thus
far I haven't found anything it does that's smaller than what pcc writes
but there is a mesaurable (time) speed improvement.  I have very little
experience with it so bear with my (hopefully not obvious) ignorance.

I took the same source and compiled it with pcc and gcc, with and without
the shared C library (-lc_s).  It outran pcc by about 30% with a 50%
increase in binary size without the shared library.  The pcc version with
shared library was about 20% larger than without it and it ran.  The gcc
binary with shared library promptly dumped core with a memory fault.  I
did RTFM but if there was a caveat in there it didn't have a big red flag
flying over it.

Is anyone else having similar results or is it just me again?  Thanks,
-- 
Bill Kennedy  usenet      {killer,att,cs.utexas.edu,sun!daver}!ssbn!bill
              internet    bill@ssbn.WLK.COM