Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

GCC-2.95 in July

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the tentativley-at-least dept.

Bananenrepublik writes "On this page, the EGCS steering committee has posted the official schedule for the transition from egcs to gcc-2.95. So expect gcc-2.95 in early July. " It looks pretty aggressive. I wish the team luck, and eagerly await the improved compiler.

5 of 66 comments (clear)

  1. Please try to get your facts right ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4

    (1) If there is something called "Cygnus Inc" it has nothing to do with Gcc. The name you are looking for is "Cygnus Solutions". If you want to be informal, you can say "Cygnus" - but don't add "Inc"; if you add "Inc", get the name right. (While "Cygnus Solutions" is looking for a new company name, I don't think one has been chosen yet.)

    (2) Cygnus is *not* the maintainer of Gcc. The maintainer of Gcc is the Egcs steering committee. The steering committee contains individuals, but no companies are members. Some of the steering committee members are Cygnus employees, including the technical manager (I forget his official title), Jeff Law. Other members belong to other organizations.

    While this is not an official statement, I am a member of the Egcs steering committee, and (until next Wednesday) a Cygnus employee.

    1. Re:Please try to get your facts right ... by Per+Bothner · · Score: 4

      I don't know why my correction was listed as from "Anonymous Coward". I wrote it.
      --Per Bothner bothner@cygnus.com.

  2. Cygnus, egcs & gcc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4

    I believe it is important to clear up a few issues
    that have come up on this thread:

    1. It's Cygnus Solutions, not Cygnus Inc. At
    least until our name is changed.

    2. Cygnus contributes to egcs, but does not
    control egcs. egcs is controlled by the
    egcs steering committee which includes
    people from a variety of different backgrounds.

    http://egcs.cygnus.com/steering.html

    It is important to realize that while Cygnus
    does have representation on the egcs steering
    committee, it does not have a majority on the
    egcs steering committee.

    3. The egcs project was already in the process of
    putting a release together. It was originally
    to be called egcs-1.2. However with the
    egcs/fsf merger we decided to rename the
    release gcc-2.95. So July may not be as
    aggressive as one might think.

    4. The development model of egcs is not changing.
    Some changes will be necessary as part of the
    egcs/fsf merger, but the basic development
    model used by egcs will not be changing.

    Jeff Law
    Cygnus Solutions
    egcs project

  3. PGCC/EGCS/GCC-2.9 by Iggy · · Score: 3


    I was wondering if someone could clarify a few points for me about PGCC, EGCS soon to be GCC-2.9.....

    1) What is the connection between PGCC and EGCS. I know that PGCC is based on the EGCS code and that the improvements from PGCC are rolled back into the EGCS code base, but how do the two compare on producing optimized code for Pentium/PentiumII machines. Does PGCC have code that doesn't go back into EGCS or does, for example, EGCS 1.1.2 have all the improvements from PGCC 1.1.1 in it?

    2) Has anybody done any basic benchmarking of the two ??


    If anybody has any answers... then please enlighten me :))

    P.S Yes, i know this isn't a mailing list or bulletin board, and the questions are slightly off topic, but please indulge me !!!


    Iggy

    1. Re:PGCC/EGCS/GCC-2.9 by espie · · Score: 3

      [Apologies for family name spelling, I'm doing this from memory...]

      No actual relationship between Pgcc and egcs, except that Mark Lehman is a frequent contributor to the egcs mailing-list...

      Most recent pgcc versions have been distributed as a somewhat largish source patch to the corresponding egcs snapshot.

      Actually, the difference is not that large... several factors are at hand:
      - sloppy diffs, so that, e.g., generated files account for a large part of the diff,
      - improvement to the compiler user interface. Pgcc does have a much larger set of help messages and framework.

      Once you remove those two unnecessary parts, you'll find out that pgcc's diffs are not THAT large.

      As far as speed goes, the difference is decreasing, as everything that's safe is incorporated into egcs (remember that pgcc has some higher, experimental level of optimizations that may be `broken'), and there are some fairly interesting intel developments in egcs these days (Joern Ronnecke's work for instance).

      Oh yes, there's also the point that all the world is not intel, so the compiler has to continue working properly on other targets...

      If you read the pgcc documentation, you'll notice that the improvement over gcc is not always `dramatic' (NOT 30% always, not even on average).

      If you want to find out for yourself, that's easy: Marc has been working on compiling a benchmark suite that's available from the same cvs repository that egcs is.