Re: Compiler Optimisation?

dewarr@my-dejanews.com
13 Dec 1998 13:47:49 -0500

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Compiler Optimisation? iain.bate@cs.york.ac.uk (Iain Bate) (1998-12-06)
Re: Compiler Optimisation? bear@sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) (1998-12-10)
Re: Compiler Optimisation? tc@charlie.cns.iit.edu (Thomas W. Christopher) (1998-12-10)
Re: Compiler Optimisation? silver@mail.webspan.net (Andy Gaynor) (1998-12-13)
Re: Compiler Optimisation? dewarr@my-dejanews.com (1998-12-13)
Re: Compiler Optimisation? albaugh@agames.com (1998-12-13)
Re: Compiler Optimisation? jfc@mit.edu (1998-12-13)
Re: Compiler Optimisation? monnier+comp/compilers/news/@tequila.cs.yale.edu (Stefan Monnier) (1998-12-18)
Re: Compiler Optimisation? bear@sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) (1998-12-18)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: dewarr@my-dejanews.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.compilers
Date: 13 Dec 1998 13:47:49 -0500
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion
References: 98-12-010 98-12-016
Keywords: optimize

    Ray Dillinger <bear@sonic.net> wrote:
> The speed-up due to the peephole stage in my experience runs between
> ten and twenty percent of overall speed -- Although, of course, it
> depends on what you put into the "peephole" stage. ...


This is misleading. Many compilers do MUCH more extensive
peephole optimization. In particular gcc gets a FAR more
significant improvement from peephole optimization.

Post a followup to this message

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