* Adam Borowski [110606 01:15]:
> On Sun, Jun 05, 2011 at 01:18:43PM +0200, Emil Langrock wrote:
> > I played around a little bit with GCC's LTO [4]. It is really impressive
> > for
> > this kind of applications. I had a size reduction and speed increase with
> > the
> > tested applications. O
On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 01:15:29AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> Speed gains for compiled executables are great, though: around 20%[2].
It depends. I have code where using -flto causes no significant
improvement (< 2%) in some cases and major performance losses (-7 to
-37%) in others. This is no
On Sun, Jun 05, 2011 at 01:18:43PM +0200, Emil Langrock wrote:
> I played around a little bit with GCC's LTO [4]. It is really impressive for
> this kind of applications. I had a size reduction and speed increase with the
> tested applications. Of course, it was just a small testset and not reall
On Sun, Jun 05, 2011 at 01:18:43PM +0200, Emil Langrock wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have currently the problem that I have to use large, computing intensive
> applications [1,2]. These are usually implemented in many source files. I
> used
> in the past pseudo c files which include all other c files [3]
4 matches
Mail list logo
