9fans - fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: forsyth@vitanuova.com
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Rant (was Re: Plan9 and Ada95?)
Date: Fri,  9 Nov 2001 14:01:23 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20011109135543.8B574199ED@mail.cse.psu.edu> (raw)

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 569 bytes --]

sometimes the plan 9 compilers do things that gcc doesn't, partly
because adherence to an often elaborate ABI isn't required.  certainly
that's true on the PowerPC and i think it's also true on the ARM. i'd
say from inspection of gcc and experience of 5?  that the 5l linker
for ARM has an easier time sorting out literal pools and ARM/Thumb
linkage than the gcc system, partly because it's working with an
abstract object program as input, not the encoded instruction forms.
we can then convert the resulting executable into a form that other
systems like.


[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 2747 bytes --]

To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Rant (was Re: Plan9 and Ada95?)
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 07:43:52 -0600 (CST)
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10111090740440.8629-100000@ultra5a.usask.ca>

plan9's compilers generate code with comparably equal performance to gcc
2.9.5

no, the code is not faster, no, the code is not noticeably slower for jobs
that do not require 5 days to complete (image rendering is what I have
tested -- povray on identical hardware).

that much I can say.

andrey

On Fri, 9 Nov 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:

> nigel@9fs.org writes:
>
> > >> Has anyone compared the efficiency of the code produced by GCC and the
> > >> Plan 9 compiler?
> >
> > I'm not sure that this is a very important issue, whichever is better.
>
> There's been a lot of noise about how GCC might be more ugly, or
> poorly constructed, or such.  I'm asking whether amidst all that noise
> anyone has bothered to see whether it actually performs its job better
> or worse.  It does seem to me to be an important question in
> evaluating tools which one is actually better at the principal job the
> tool is designed to perform.
>

             reply	other threads:[~2001-11-09 14:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 74+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-11-09 14:01 forsyth [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-11-11 16:32 presotto
2001-11-12 10:44 ` Thomas Bushnell, BSG
2001-11-10 10:15 forsyth
2001-11-09 22:54 David Gordon Hogan
2001-11-09 22:46 David Gordon Hogan
2001-11-09 22:37 David Gordon Hogan
2001-11-09 22:26 David Gordon Hogan
2001-11-10  0:10 ` William Josephson
2001-11-10  8:29   ` Matthew Hannigan
2001-11-10  8:39     ` Andrey A Mirtchovski
2001-11-11  1:38       ` Steve Kilbane
2001-11-11  3:34         ` Dan Cross
2001-11-11 11:20           ` Steve Kilbane
2001-11-11 17:30             ` Dan Cross
2001-11-12 10:42           ` Thomas Bushnell, BSG
2001-11-11  8:25         ` paurea
2001-11-11 17:31           ` Dan Cross
2001-11-09 22:11 David Gordon Hogan
2001-11-12 10:41 ` martin.m.dowie
2001-11-09 13:54 forsyth
2001-11-12 10:32 ` Thomas Bushnell, BSG
2001-11-09  7:41 Russ Cox
2001-11-09 17:27 ` Dan Cross
2001-11-08 18:03 anothy
2001-11-09 21:01 ` Boyd Roberts
2001-11-08 15:09 forsyth
2001-11-09 10:17 ` Thomas Bushnell, BSG
2001-11-08 15:06 forsyth
2001-11-08 15:00 presotto
2001-11-08 12:49 rob pike
2001-11-09 10:09 ` Thomas Bushnell, BSG
2001-11-12 10:34 ` Andrew Simmons
2001-11-13 10:26   ` Thomas Bushnell, BSG
2001-11-08 12:30 bwc
2001-11-08 12:58 ` Re[2]: " Matt
2001-11-09  0:06   ` Noah Diewald
2001-11-09  9:51 ` Taj Khattra
2001-11-08 12:05 nigel
2001-11-09 10:08 ` Thomas Bushnell, BSG
2001-11-09 13:43   ` Andrey A Mirtchovski
2001-11-08  8:51 Russ Cox
2001-11-08  9:22 ` Lucio De Re
2001-11-08  6:45 anothy
2001-11-08  8:05 ` Lucio De Re
2001-11-08 10:36   ` Christopher Nielsen
2001-11-08 10:39 ` Thomas Bushnell, BSG
2001-11-08 21:22   ` Matthew Hannigan
2001-11-09  0:30 ` Steve Kilbane
2001-11-09  7:02   ` George Michaelson
2001-11-09 15:52     ` Caffienator
2001-11-09 21:06     ` Boyd Roberts
2001-11-08  1:57 okamoto
2001-11-09  0:22 ` Dan Cross
2001-11-07 21:34 anothy
2001-11-08  5:30 ` Lucio De Re
2001-11-08  5:43   ` George Michaelson
2001-11-08  7:07     ` Jim Choate
2001-11-08  7:40     ` Lucio De Re
2001-11-08 10:40       ` Thomas Bushnell, BSG
2001-11-08 20:15       ` Quinn Dunkan
2001-11-08  5:59   ` Andrey A Mirtchovski
2001-11-08  7:16 ` Steve Kilbane
2001-11-29  4:44 ` Boyd Roberts
2001-11-07 19:58 forsyth
2001-11-07 20:18 ` Lucio De Re
2001-11-07 19:25 forsyth
2001-11-07 20:14 ` Lucio De Re
2001-11-08 10:38 ` Caffienator
2001-11-07 18:56 David Gordon Hogan
2001-11-07 19:33 ` Lucio De Re
2001-11-08  1:43 ` Dan Cross
2001-11-29  5:01 ` Boyd Roberts
2001-11-07 17:54 [9fans] Re: Plan9 and Ada95? David Gordon Hogan
2001-11-07 18:26 ` [9fans] Rant (was Re: Plan9 and Ada95?) Lucio De Re
2001-11-08 10:39   ` Thomas Bushnell, BSG

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20011109135543.8B574199ED@mail.cse.psu.edu \
    --to=forsyth@vitanuova.com \
    --cc=9fans@cse.psu.edu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).