| Posted by tim2718281, 02-14-2010, 06:22 PM | | Has anyone seen a review of available Linux C compilers, and a comparison of the performance of the generated code?
|
| Posted by Dr:linux, 02-15-2010, 01:25 AM | | GCC 4.3.3 is the latest one released on Jan 2010. Most of the reviews concerning this says that it delivers a smooth performance and is mainly a bug-fix release containing fixes and many other serious bugs that were in the prior release GCC 4.3.2.
|
| Posted by CArmstrong, 02-15-2010, 01:51 AM | | gcc is the primary C/C++ compiler on Linux. Is there a certain reason you'd need to use something else?
|
| Posted by RemyHorton, 02-15-2010, 04:37 AM | | There is http://www.coyotegulch.com/reviews/l...ers/index.html but it is about 6 years old.
GCC is a bit bloated, but it does seem to have the most aggressive program optimisation. Other (free) compilers for Linux such as TCC and LCC tend to focus on other things such as portability, small resource footprints, and/or compilation speed.
|
| Posted by NelsonT, 02-15-2010, 06:50 AM | | Depend on the HW platform you need.
If on ARM cpu, I tend to use ARMcc that generated better binary than GCC for sure. I had deployed several multi-media codec, around 10~30% performance gains in execute speed and code size.
Code sizes are sensitive when running on resources limited environment(small cache size).
If on X86 platform, choice Intel dev. tools.
http://software.intel.com/en-us/arti...ware-download/
I don't have experiences of Intel compilers on linux, but Intel does good jobs on Windows. When I did camera driver with video decoding (C + inline assembly coding), my tests shown Intel > Microsoft > GCC.
Few open-source codecs were compiled using Intel compiler and released for better performance, (foobar2000's addon)
Hope this help.
Last edited by NelsonT; 02-15-2010 at 06:55 AM.
Reason: correction
|
| Posted by tim2718281, 02-15-2010, 10:37 AM | | Yes, thank you. It's interesting that Intel make available their compiler free for non-commercial use. I was not aware of that.
|
| Posted by n3r0x, 02-16-2010, 11:11 PM | | both Borland and Intel have better optimization in their compilers but then again they are not free (not borland anyway) as GCC is.. Personally i use GCC on unix/linux.. I usually just compile CGI scripts in it anyway
|
| Posted by mark45, 02-17-2010, 03:45 AM | | GCC is a bit bloated, but it does seem to have the most aggressive program optimization. Other (free) compilers for Linux such as TCC to focus on other things such as portability, small resource footprints, and/or compilation speed.
|
| Posted by Nizumzen, 02-17-2010, 02:08 PM | | The Intel compiler is much better optimisation wise than GCC on the x86 and x86_64 platforms.
Plus there is also LLVM/Clang which is fantastic and will soon be the default compiler on Mac OS X I imagine.
|
|
 Add to Favourites
 Print this Article
|
