From: pavenis AT lanet DOT lv To: CBFalconer , djgpp AT delorie DOT com Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 14:25:48 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: GCC 3.1 and DJGPP - observations. Message-ID: <3CFCCDEC.29537.AC5AA5@localhost> In-reply-to: <3CFC9165.47E43C09@yahoo.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.01) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On 4 Jun 2002 at 10:22, CBFalconer wrote: > Having gotten this installed, and having removed GCC 2.953, I have > recompiled a few things unchanged, and am observing the following: > > 1) It is showing up failure to #include here and there > when using strlen and strcmp. Good. gcc-2.95.X permitted to use strlen(), strcmp() and some other functions without declaration. gcc-3.0.X and gcc-3.1 no more permits that. > 2) The executables are a little bit smaller, compiled with > gstabs+. However after passing through strip the executables are > somewhat larger. Don't know why. My experience shows that both -gcoff (read -g) and -gstabs+ are often near to unusable with many C++ programs which uses STL. -gdwarf-2 seems to behave better (at least with GDB-5.2). So maybe it's time to switch to -gdwarf-2 as the default soon? The size of executable with debug info seriously increases when -gdwarf-2 is being used. > 3) All versions were compiled with O2. Looking at the generated > code with "objdump -dS" it appears as if the optimization is quite > different. Many lumps seem to be relegated to "final" code > outside the purvey of the source. This may be related to 2) About warnings generated by gcc-3.1: I often use '-W -Wall -Werror' in my code and usually this forced to do some changes to use a new versions, but not too much. Andris