GCC 3.0.4 is Out

Isle writes: "GCC 3.0.4 has finally been released. As those who has tried the prereleases will know this version finally compiles a working version of aRts and thus compiles the entire KDE-suite. With the Linux kernel compiling already with the 3.0.3 version, gcc 3.0 now compiles all major projects I know of. Is it finally time to dump that good old 2.95?"

Comments

Re:C++ too slow

[__past__]

How would using GTK+ make GCC use precompiled headers?

A more interesting question seems to be: Do the binaries run faster? Some people happen to run their apps more often than they compile them...

Info propaganda

[__past__]

One "bug" I would really like to see fixed in GCC is the bogus "Linux and the GNU project" section in the info manual. Heck, it's supposed to be a compiler documentation, not a general "The world according to the FSF" rant.

What's next, the Emacs scratch buffer explaining why Free Software is better than Open Source? ls(1) warning about Non-GNU licensed binaries?

glibc 2.2.5

[Skjellifetti]

Is also out now and according to the changelog, it finally works with gcc 3.

Re:Info

[Yarn]

I would be quite happy if the entire 'info' system dissapeared off the face of my installation, permanently.

It's a pita to use/write/index

man forever!

KDE speedup ?

[crsm]

A new 2.2.5 version of glibc is also out and this is perhaps even better news for KDE users. According to the glibc changelog:

• optimizations in the dynamic linker. binaries created by recent binutils versions start up quicker due to reduced time spend on relocations.

If I am reading this correctly, this is the much talked-about fix for the long startup times of KDE programs.

Yay :-)

Re:Info

[PD]

I use the --subnodes option and pipe through less to get a more usable printout. The info program has a really crappy interface.

like this:

info --subnodes bison | more

Re:C++ too slow

[neurojab]

There's one line in my environment setup in windows that makes it possible for me to compile my projects in the shortest possible time... DISABLE_PCH=T

Why do you want precompiled headers? Sure you might get a couple of faster compiles... when you're not scratching your head trying to figure out why PCH is failing.

GCC adding this feature would only cause me to spend more time compiling programs than I already do... unless they come up with a smarter implementation than MSVC.

We tried removing it once...

[devphil]

...but RMS won't let us.

There are days when I dream about another GCC fork.

Been there, done that

[devphil]

It is even slower at compiling C++ than the old one.

That's because C++ got bigger since the old one.

When will they implement precompiled headers.

A precompiled headers branch was created some time ago. Feel free to try using it. It's been implemented by two different commercial groups already; they're just merging in one of those solutions.

Perhaps you think implementing precompiled headers is easy? I invite you to try.

Oh why, why. why havnt they done it already!

If are are dissatisfied with the compiler, and unwilling to contribute your own time to make it better, you should definitely demand a refund of the money you paid for it.