Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!bu-cs!ics!david
From: david@ics.COM (David B. Lewis)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: CORRECTION: X11R3 with gcc 1.35 or 1.36 (1.32 or 1.33) [1.34.2]
Summary: gcc version
Keywords: X11R3, gcc
Message-ID: <278@ics.COM>
Date: 20 Apr 89 15:19:01 GMT
References: <1492@cod.NOSC.MIL< <1496@cod.NOSC.MIL>
Organization: Integrated Computer Solutions Inc., Cambridge MA
Lines: 23

In article <1496@cod.NOSC.MIL<, wbm@cod.NOSC.MIL (William B. Morrison) writes:
< In article <1492@cod.NOSC.MIL>, wbm@cod.NOSC.MIL (William B. Morrison) writes:
< > 
< > The concensus of the Comp.windows.x newsgroup appears to be gcc 1.34 as
< > the optional compiler of choice. Has anyone tried 1.35 or 1.36? 
< > Are any benchmarks with these versions available? 
< 
< That should have read "1.32 or 1.33". Sorry for the confusion (I don't
< think the FSF wants me to pre-release their software early either ;-).
< 
< Ten minutes ahead of my time,
< --Bill Morrison
< wbm@nosc.mil

The current release of gcc is 1.34.2, which started shipping this week.

I haven't tested benchmarks with X; but someone else here ran gcc 1.27 through
some standard benchmarks on a couple of machines and found a 15-20%
increase in speed over programs compiled with the standard C compiler.

(Sorry to post; mail to you bounced.)
-- 
David B. Lewis david@ics.com ics!david@buita.bu.edu david%ics.UUCP@buita.bu.edu