Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer.

rhyde@cs.ucr.edu (Randy Hyde)
9 Jul 1997 23:19:28 -0400

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[12 earlier articles]
Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer. vkarvone@raita.oulu.fi (1997-07-04)
Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer. rhyde@cs.ucr.edu (1997-07-04)
Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer. WStreett@shell.monmouth.com (1997-07-08)
Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer. monnier+comp/compilers/news/@tequila.cs.yale.edu (Stefan Monnier) (1997-07-08)
Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer. charles.marslett@tempe.vlsi.com (1997-07-08)
Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer. leichter@smarts.com (Jerry Leichter) (1997-07-09)
Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer. rhyde@cs.ucr.edu (1997-07-09)
Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer. rhyde@cs.ucr.edu (1997-07-09)
Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer. monnier+comp/compilers/news/@tequila.cs.yale.edu (Stefan Monnier) (1997-07-13)
Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer. dietz@interaccess.com (1997-07-13)
Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer. cef@geodesic.com (Charles Fiterman) (1997-07-13)
Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer. nino@complang.tuwien.ac.at (Marinos Yannikos) (1997-07-13)
Re: optimizing compiler against average assembly programmer. 71511.3711@CompuServe.COM (Brian W. Inglis) (1997-07-16)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: rhyde@cs.ucr.edu (Randy Hyde)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers,comp.lang.asm.x86
Date: 9 Jul 1997 23:19:28 -0400
Organization: UC Riverside, Dept. of Computer Science
References: 97-06-071 97-06-123 97-07-008 97-07-039
Keywords: optimize, practice, C

>>>>>
And I agree with you about PC C compilers. The quality of Microsoft
compilers' code has clearly declined over the past 4-5 years, and I
suspect it has been a result of pressure to add features to the tools
at the expense of maintaining (or improving) the code generator
quality. And lest I be criticized for Microsoft bashing, I have to
add that Borland and Watcom have lost even more ground.
<<<<<


I'm not sure I follow this. Are you saying that MSVC produces *worse*
code than 4-5 years ago, or are you saying that other compilers have
gotten better and MSVC has stood still? Although adding C++ (to
simple C) obviously makes the optimization process more difficult,
it's hard to believe that MSVC has actually gotten worse.


I ahven't looked in the past year or so, but about two years ago
MSVC was generally better than GCC.
Randy Hyde
--


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.