Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 16:25:13 +0200 (IST) From: Eli Zaretskii X-Sender: eliz AT is To: 1043730 cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: far pointers again In-Reply-To: <7tf476$8qj@cs.vu.nl> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Wed, 6 Oct 1999 Fokkema DOT DBRA AT delorie DOT com wrote: > I don't want to have test results and other stuff to justify the fact that > the usage of far pointers in djgpp results in less efficient code. Interesting attitude. And I thought that one is supposed to measure and profile before one begins optimizing, since the first profile one generates usually is a big surprise: the hot spots are in a place that is entirely different from where you expected. Without profiling, you can (and usually will) end up optimizing to death some code that takes 20% of the total run time. > So what is this gcc group that maybe should be told about considering far > pointers? Try gnu.gcc.bug. There's also a mailing list for discussing GCC internals, I think you can find the address somewhere on http://gcc.gnu.org/faq.html.