Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: A GCC Proposal To Build It Better, Faster

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,901

    Default A GCC Proposal To Build It Better, Faster

    Phoronix: A GCC Proposal To Build It Better, Faster

    There's a proposal within the GCC development camp to change the CFLAGS under which the GNU Compiler Collection is built when in a release mode...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTEzOTA

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,060

    Default

    What if you compile GCC with LLVM and LLVM with GCC lol.

    And compile GCC with GCC.
    And LLVM with LLVM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut,USA
    Posts
    962

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    What if you compile GCC with LLVM and LLVM with GCC lol.

    And compile GCC with GCC.
    And LLVM with LLVM.
    And test programs compiled with the compilers that were created to show code size and general program performance comparisons. Maybe there are indeed differences when a compiler is built using another compiler

    Aside: would be interesting to see how gcc would behave if built with LLVM instead



    Michael, what do you think?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    109

    Default Compilers are deterministic

    Quote Originally Posted by DeepDayze View Post
    And test programs compiled with the compilers that were created to show code size and general program performance comparisons. Maybe there are indeed differences when a compiler is built using another compiler

    Aside: would be interesting to see how gcc would behave if built with LLVM instead



    Michael, what do you think?
    If the compilers generate different outputs depending on what compiler they were compiled with, that sounds like a bug. That'd be like a spreadsheet producing different answers depending on what compiler the application was built with.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    772

    Default

    But will they also build it harder and stronger?

  6. #6

    Default

    What's the point of it?

    No one builds GCC using its default CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,795

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by birdie View Post
    What's the point of it?

    No one builds GCC using its default CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS.
    Putting -O3, LTO and PGO in defaults will probably result in distros also using them, even if they customize a lot. Especially PGO could improve things a bit.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,128

    Default

    "make profiledbuild" has been an option for ages.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •