DOS ain't dead - C vs. ASM (size vs speed)

C vs. ASM (size vs speed) (Developers)

posted by Rugxulo , Usono, 08.04.2009, 19:24

> > EDIT: Headers vs. units still doesn't explain why successive GCCs keep
> > getting slower, even with -O0.
>
> I've no idea. I've never benchmarked gcc versions against itself (and
> never used gcc on dos in practice)

Never used DJGPP? Well, you are odd. :-D

> > It shouldn't have to do that much more
> > these days than it did ten years ago (for C89, at least), right?
>
> If so, why don't you use a ten years old version? If it doesn't matter....

I do, remember my GCC 2.95.3 / BinUtils 2.16 / DJGPP 2.03p2 single-floppy package? But that was more of a size consideration. If I could've crammed the latest, I probably would have. The whole idea was the have a stand-alone GCC compiler that was as new as possible (-mcpu=pentiumpro) but still small and useful. Still, it should be "good enough" for normal ANSI C stuff. (Okay, March 2001 -> April 2009 is only eight years, but since you consider WinME's 8.5 to be 10, I guess this counts too, heh.) BTW, it matters less on newer machines, but it still does matter, unless you like buying new cpus every six months (I don't).

Post reply

Complete thread:

GNU Emacs for DJGPP (22.3 or 23.0.92) - Rugxulo, 01.04.2009, 20:46 (Developers)
- GNU Emacs for DJGPP (22.3 or 23.0.92) - marcov, 01.04.2009, 23:28
  - GNU Emacs for DJGPP (22.3 or 23.0.92) - Rugxulo, 02.04.2009, 00:20
    - GNU Emacs for DJGPP (22.3 or 23.0.92) - Dennis, 04.04.2009, 18:38
      - GNU Emacs for DJGPP (22.3 or 23.0.92) - Rugxulo, 04.04.2009, 20:10
        GNU Emacs for DJGPP (22.3 or 23.0.92) - Dennis, 04.04.2009, 22:23
        GNU Emacs for DJGPP (22.3 or 23.0.92) - Rugxulo, 05.04.2009, 23:47
        GNU Emacs for DJGPP (22.3 or 23.0.92) - Dennis, 06.04.2009, 01:25
        65536 byte text files - ecm, 06.04.2009, 19:23
        65536 byte text files - Rugxulo, 07.04.2009, 00:01
        65536 byte text files - ecm, 07.04.2009, 00:14
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - Rugxulo, 07.04.2009, 00:27
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - marcov, 07.04.2009, 13:20
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - Rugxulo, 07.04.2009, 13:35
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - marcov, 08.04.2009, 10:33
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - Rugxulo, 08.04.2009, 19:24
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - RayeR, 08.04.2009, 21:09
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - rr, 08.04.2009, 21:16
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - EZGCC for v2 - Rugxulo, 09.04.2009, 01:11
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - EZGCC for v2 - RayeR, 09.04.2009, 23:15
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - EZGCC for v2 - Rugxulo, 10.04.2009, 05:02
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - EZGCC for v2 - RayeR, 10.04.2009, 14:05
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - marcov, 08.04.2009, 21:44
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - Rugxulo, 09.04.2009, 00:55
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - marcov, 09.04.2009, 09:09
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - Rugxulo, 09.04.2009, 14:14
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - marcov, 09.04.2009, 21:17
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - Rugxulo, 09.04.2009, 21:38
        C vs. ASM (size vs speed) - marcov, 10.04.2009, 10:16
        EZ-GCC v2 for 386 (1.2 MB 5.25" FD) - Rugxulo, 16.04.2009, 18:38
        EZ-GCC v2 for 386, GNU Emacs 23.0.95 pretest - Rugxulo, 05.07.2009, 21:22
        GNU Emacs 23.0.96 pretest (last one!) - Rugxulo, 16.07.2009, 06:07
        GNU Emacs 23.1 - Rugxulo, 11.09.2009, 06:54
        GNU Emacs for DJGPP (22.3 or 23.0.92) - Rugxulo, 07.04.2009, 00:00
- GNU Emacs 23.0.92 pretest (DJGPP) - Rugxulo, 04.04.2009, 20:38
- GNU Emacs for DJGPP (23.0.92 "pretest") - Rugxulo, 09.04.2009, 21:40