Linked by Eugenia Loli on Fri 30th Sep 2005 00:04 UTC
General Development Mark Mitchell announced the availability of GCC 4.0.2. He explains, "this release is a minor release, containing primarily fixes for regressions in GCC 4.0.1 relative to previous releases."
Thread beginning with comment 38151
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Back it up!
by voidlogic on Fri 30th Sep 2005 01:35 UTC in reply to "Back it up!"
voidlogic
Member since:
2005-09-03

GCC is very decent. Not the best of the best, but very decent. And here are the numbers! http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=5602&page=3

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Back it up!
by butters on Fri 30th Sep 2005 07:17 in reply to "RE: Back it up!"
butters Member since:
2005-07-08

So C code compiled with GCC performs worse than C++ or C# compiled with Visual Studio, despite the overheads incurred by the latter languages. But at least it's faster than Java or Python!!

Look, without GCC, there would be no free software system as we know it today. My comment didn't deserve the "Hey, take that back!!" kind of response. GCC doesn't support basic optimization techniques aggressively implemented in just about every other C/C++ compiler, and it isn't a very good Java compiler either. It produces working code (in most cases), and beyond that it's absolutely mediocre.

I'm just saying there's a lot of work yet to be done.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Back it up!
by agentj on Fri 30th Sep 2005 07:23 in reply to "RE[2]: Back it up!"
agentj Member since:
2005-08-19

Yes. There wouldn't be BeOS, Linux, and other non-Microsoft OSes, probably Apache, PHP, MySQL and most of free software.
"GCC doesn't support basic optimization techniques"
Which ones ?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Back it up!
by on Fri 30th Sep 2005 17:56 in reply to "RE[2]: Back it up!"
Member since:

Get off your ass and donate your time to make it the "best of breed." Or if you are really talented, get hired by IBM or RedHat and work on GCC for C/C++.

Otherwise, proclaiming a compiler suite that targets a minimum of 7 languages versus a compiler targeting 2 is pointless.

Wanna take a guess at how butt slow Intel's compiler is for Objective-C?

Oh wait! It doesn't and will not support Objective-C. Guess Apple will have to do all the work on that one and give it back to GCC.

The Autovectorization will be nice along with several advancements to C and Objective-C at 4.1 and beyond. Get hired by Apple if you want to know more.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Back it up!
by bn-7bc on Fri 30th Sep 2005 12:43 in reply to "RE: Back it up!"
bn-7bc Member since:
2005-09-04

Correct me if I'm wrong but the benchmarks where made with gcc 3.3.1, didn't there go a lot of optimization ito the 4.x.x codebase?
maby those benchmarks should be repeted with the latest gcc to get a more currant resoult.

Plecae give me feedback on this, I.m not a programmer so I may be wrong

Reply Parent Score: 1