Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 23rd Apr 2009 16:47 UTC, submitted by diegocg
General Development GCC 4.4.0 has been released. There are many interesting changes, including the merge of the Graphite branch, which is "a new framework for loop optimizations based on a polyhedral intermediate representation", improved support of the upcoming C++0x standard, and a new register allocator.
Order by: Score:
auto
by vivainio on Thu 23rd Apr 2009 20:38 UTC
vivainio
Member since:
2008-12-26

The cool stuff here, of course, is C++0x support, and 'auto' in particular:

http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.4/cxx0x_status.html

http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n1984.pdf

Perhaps this will help C++ adoption among "lazy" coders (hey, everyone is lazy at this time of Python & likes).

Reply Score: 3

RE: auto
by flynn on Thu 23rd Apr 2009 21:09 UTC in reply to "auto"
flynn Member since:
2009-03-19

So the C family is finally getting type inference? About frickin time. It's only been available in ML for the last 30 years.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: auto
by vivainio on Thu 23rd Apr 2009 21:33 UTC in reply to "RE: auto"
vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

Well, it's only the trivial kind of type inference (function signatures will still need fully specified types), but it certainly covers the most annoying case (esp. apparent when you use lots of templates).

Reply Score: 1

RE: auto
by shaddack on Fri 24th Apr 2009 09:03 UTC in reply to "auto"
shaddack Member since:
2009-04-23

The cool stuff here, of course, is C++0x support, and 'auto' in particular:

http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.4/cxx0x_status.html

http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n1984.pdf

Perhaps this will help C++ adoption among "lazy" coders (hey, everyone is lazy at this time of Python & likes).


I'm very impressed by GCC in general and support for C++0x (even though experimental). Good that the developers are keeping up with the development of C++. The C++0x support is the thing that I find most interesting with this release. This and the new optimization features.

Reply Score: 1

RE: auto
by benhonghu on Sat 25th Apr 2009 03:32 UTC in reply to "auto"
benhonghu Member since:
2008-08-24

The most meaty features in 0x, imho, are concepts and lambda expressions. Alas, how good life would be if g++4.4 supports these two. 4.5, maybe?

Reply Score: 1

4.4.x vs LLVM-GCC vs 4.3.x
by adkilla on Fri 24th Apr 2009 06:26 UTC
adkilla
Member since:
2005-07-07

Any info on performance? I would like to know how is stacks up against the 4.3.x series and whether it could match llvm-gcc code optimizations.

-Ad

Reply Score: 2

RE: 4.4.x vs LLVM-GCC vs 4.3.x
by Valhalla on Fri 24th Apr 2009 07:55 UTC in reply to "4.4.x vs LLVM-GCC vs 4.3.x"
Valhalla Member since:
2006-01-24

adkilla wrote:
-"Any info on performance? I would like to know how is stacks up against the 4.3.x series and whether it could match llvm-gcc code optimizations."

Haven't had a chance to try it yet, but the new graphite loop optimization framework should potentially give some speedups. Personally the '-fprofile-correction' option will help me since I've had some problems on certain programs with corrupted profiles. As for the llvm performance, can you point me to any benchmarks which shows gcc versus llvm?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: 4.4.x vs LLVM-GCC vs 4.3.x
by shaddack on Fri 24th Apr 2009 09:00 UTC in reply to "RE: 4.4.x vs LLVM-GCC vs 4.3.x"
shaddack Member since:
2009-04-23

adkilla wrote:
-"Any info on performance? I would like to know how is stacks up against the 4.3.x series and whether it could match llvm-gcc code optimizations."

Haven't had a chance to try it yet, but the new graphite loop optimization framework should potentially give some speedups. Personally the '-fprofile-correction' option will help me since I've had some problems on certain programs with corrupted profiles. As for the llvm performance, can you point me to any benchmarks which shows gcc versus llvm?


Is there any site that keeps performace comparisions of compilers? Would be interesting to read that I think.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: 4.4.x vs LLVM-GCC vs 4.3.x
by adkilla on Fri 24th Apr 2009 09:13 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: 4.4.x vs LLVM-GCC vs 4.3.x"
adkilla Member since:
2005-07-07

This is the most comprehensive site IMHO for comparisons:
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

For gcc (includes gcc-4.4-svn) vs icc:
http://multimedia.cx/eggs/icc-vs-gcc-smackdown-round-3/

-Ad

Reply Score: 2

Valhalla Member since:
2006-01-24

Thanks for the links adkilla, judging by the (outdated as you said) benchmarks there weren't much difference between gcc and llvm apart from that weird anomaly on the nbody test where llvm was insanely slow. Here's hoping there will be an update to this benchmark comparing gcc 4.4 vs llvm 2.5

Also interesting to see in the icc vs gcc smackdown that gcc 4.4 is edging closer to icc.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: 4.4.x vs LLVM-GCC vs 4.3.x
by tyrione on Fri 24th Apr 2009 21:16 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: 4.4.x vs LLVM-GCC vs 4.3.x"
tyrione Member since:
2005-11-21

This is the most comprehensive site IMHO for comparisons:
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

For gcc (includes gcc-4.4-svn) vs icc:
http://multimedia.cx/eggs/icc-vs-gcc-smackdown-round-3/

-Ad



From that page:

Objective-C GNU c plus a thin layer of smalltalk Debian


What's wrong with this picture?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: 4.4.x vs LLVM-GCC vs 4.3.x
by adkilla on Fri 24th Apr 2009 09:09 UTC in reply to "RE: 4.4.x vs LLVM-GCC vs 4.3.x"
adkilla Member since:
2005-07-07

There is some outdated info here:
http://leonardo-m.livejournal.com/73732.html

I am using icc mostly. I only use gcc when I need to interface with Cocoa or use code that is dependent on gcc extensions.

-Ad

Reply Score: 1