| 1 |
sorry for missing that vital point, it was a comparsion of the |
| 2 |
compilation process, not the end results. |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Thats the issue when talking about the -speed- of a compiler, when |
| 5 |
comparing the -quality- on the other hand, then we are talking of how |
| 6 |
well the compiled code is performing. There are several benchmarks of |
| 7 |
this avaiable, just search the net and you shall find :) |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
//Spider |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
begin quote |
| 15 |
On 08 Apr 2002 07:33:13 +0200 |
| 16 |
Geert Bevin <gbevin@××××.com> wrote: |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> What were you benchmarking since you never even mentioned that, the |
| 19 |
> compilation of the software or the resulting executable's performance. |
| 20 |
> The first one seems pretty useless to me, while the latter does make |
| 21 |
> sense. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
begin happy99.exe |
| 28 |
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature! |
| 29 |
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information. |
| 30 |
end |
Archives