-27 Nov 96  16:46:00-
=Steffen Offermann babbled to Mike Phillips about C Compiler=

 MP> If you break the source up into small chunks and use a make 
 MP> utility, rebuilds for bug fixes or whatnot becomes tolerable 
 MP> since you're only compiling a very small portion of the program.

 SO> Anybody who calls himself a serious programmer should consider a
 SO> modular project design from the beginning, that's not in question.

And with modular design comes less thrashing, and that's what slows it
down.  Break it up into small enough chunks that everything can fit into
RAM, and GCC isn't all that slow.  If you can preload and use pipes, all
the better.

 SO> But especially in the first half of a large project you will usually
 SO> do crucial changes to *.H files quite frequently and thus cause a
 SO> lot of dependancies to be updated. A slow compiler (or rather a

But do you really need to turn the optimizations on in this stage of
development?  That's what really slows it down, since some of the
optimizations, particularly those in O2 and O3, can require large
amounts of memory.

 SO> slow development system, which includes the processor) can be a
 SO> real pain in the neck in these situations.

True.  But if that's all you've got, then that's all you've got.  More
RAM and a faster CPU will speed up every aspect of OS/2.  If you have
the opportunity to upgrade, then do so regardless of the compiler you're
using.  A heftier computer will help your compiler, but it will help
every aspect of your system as well.  The point is, GCC will run on a
486/33 with 8 megs, and if you've got a couple hundred bucks, spend it
on RAM rather than a commercial compiler that may run slightly faster,
unless, of course, you need all the bells and whistles of a commercial
compiler.  But, AFAIK, commercial C++ compilers need just as much or more
RAM than GCC.

Mike Phillips
INTERNET:  phil4086{at}utdallas.edu


... Hackers know all the right MOVs.
--- FMail 1.0g