g++ performance (was Re: Mico Performance && Re: mico RPMS)

[David Abilleira Freijeiro <odaf nexo es>]

Miguel de Icaza wrote:
> 
> > Kewl.  I have a lowly P75, and it'd take quite a while to compile :)  But
> > one question:  Considering how long this takes to compile, just how large
> > are the RPMs?  It sounds like they could be quite the long download...
> > Also, does anyone have a rough figure on how much memory/horsepower a
> > minimal app using these tools takes?
> 
> The compilation times are due to the extensive use of C++ templates
> and the implementation of those in the g++ compiler.
> 
> Miguel.
> 
> --
>          To unsubscribe: mail gnome-list-request@gnome.org with
>                        "unsubscribe" as the Subject.

	I think that g++ is far slower than other C++ compilers (well, at least
than Borland C++ compilers in Windows/Dos environments). I have a
Pentium 100Mhz with 32 MB and compiling gtk+ C aplications goes fine,
but when I use gtk-- and do my work in C++ (I love C++ unlike other
people here), my system is too slow, and the gtk-- headers are not so
big.

	I´am using gcc 2.7.2.3 in a Red Hat 5.0, ¿is egcs or gcc 2.8 faster or
have them the same problem? ¿have any one of you compared the
compilation speed of theese compilers?

	David.
-- 
+--------------------------+---------------------------+
|David Abilleira Freijeiro | Pontevedra, España        |
+--------------------------+---------------------------+
|http://members.xoom.com/odaf   (mailto:odaf@nexo.es)  |
|    (UNED, Mis Programas, Linux, Programación, etc.)  |
+------------------------------------------------------+