From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,ec4f8ae8cbf8519f X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Stephen Leake Subject: Re: Ada vs. C: performance, size Date: 1997/01/10 Message-ID: <32D646A7.1AEF@gsfc.nasa.gov>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 208929439 references: <9701092022.AA15007@most> content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center -- Greenbelt, Maryland USA mime-version: 1.0 reply-to: Stephen.Leake@gsfc.nasa.gov newsgroups: comp.lang.ada x-mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; U) Date: 1997-01-10T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Just an anecdote: for a UT69R00 target, I have some C code that aborts the gcc compiler when using -O0, but not with -O2. The problem is that the register allocator runs out of registers! This is a VERY simple chip, without even indexed addressing, so gcc gives up. But with -O2, it does a much better job of figuring out how to use the registers efficiently, and can compile successfully. If anyone has had a similar experience with a gcc port, I'd like to hear about it, particularly if you have any advice on how to make it better! -- - Stephe