Ignore the troll On Mon, 11 Dec 2023, 17:28 Dave Blanchard, <d...@killthe.net> wrote:
> Hi Jingwen, > > This is the same GCC which in recent versions produces something like two > dozen extraneous, useless, no-op instructions when doing a simple 64-bit > math operation on 32-bit systems, and does not use SSE properly either. In > each major release these problems get worse. The code generator is clearly > in a state of slow degradation, starting about GCC version 5 or 6--not > coincidentally the same time when the major version numbers started > increasingly so rapidly, although it really has been junk since the > beginning. > > Stefan Kanthak hammered this point home numerous times on this list, much > to the ire of people like Jonathan Wakely who called him a noob, telling > him to "go file a bug" in a filing cabinet in some obscure corner of a > disused lavatory so that it can be safely ignored, and so on. > > It seems that if correct code generation and optimization is important to > you (as it should be), GCC is NOT the compiler to be using. I'm all the > time discovering new and crazy problems with this convoluted pile of junk. > My recent foray into bootstrapping GNAT (ADA) has opened up yet another can > of worms. It's broken on GCC 10, and even more broken on GCC 9, and this > despite 30+ years of development. > > Sometimes these days I even blame GCC when it wasn't at fault after all, > because it's making itself into more and more of a likely suspect as the > years go by. > > I haven't examined the code output of Clang to see how it compares, but > it's worth serious investigation. > > Dave >
