From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-07-28 14:51:27
Juanma Barranquero <jmbarranquero_at_[hidden]> writes:
> On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 13:03:36 -0400
> David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Well, that's self contradictory!
> Not really. A bit later it says:
>> On all x86 compatibles (Celeron, PIII, P4, Athlon, etc) you need gcc
>> 2.95.x or earlier, or gcc 3.1 or newer.
I don't see what that has to do with the contradiction I quoted.
First they say that GCCs newer than 2.95.x will be slower, then later
they say that the fastest GCC they can find is 3.1.
> WRT best optimizer
>> Also, I'm strongly suspicious that they only tested with vc6 and not
>> with vc7.1.
> I tend to agree, but OTOH, trying the Mojo test:
> so, at least on certain situations (RVO?) gcc seems to be ahead of
Well, and EH, probably.
> Unless I'm interpreting the results in too simplistic a way or I've
> done something wrong with compiler options, of course :)
Anything's possible ;->
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk