Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New GCC 5.0 Changes, Command-Line Options That Landed So Far

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • New GCC 5.0 Changes, Command-Line Options That Landed So Far

    Phoronix: New GCC 5.0 Changes, Command-Line Options That Landed So Far

    While we're just a few months into the GCC 4.10 release cycle that's going to be released as GCC 5, there's already some release notes forming for this 2015 open-source compiler update...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTc3MzE

  • #2
    One small but upcoming feature that I like is that gcc can be configured to generate instructions for a default target. The configure option "--with-arch=" will set the default and so one can have the compiler produce slightly better code without having to touch any Makefiles, setting environment variables or passing options to various configure and build scripts.

    It is small, it is simple, but it is one of those things where you have to ask yourself: what took it so long?!

    Comment


    • #3
      Also in but not listed in changes yet are some warning options which will help you help the compiler devirtualize function calls
      http://hubicka.blogspot.com/2014/08/...-5-asking.html

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by sdack View Post
        One small but upcoming feature that I like is that gcc can be configured to generate instructions for a default target. The configure option "--with-arch=" will set the default and so one can have the compiler produce slightly better code without having to touch any Makefiles, setting environment variables or passing options to various configure and build scripts.

        It is small, it is simple, but it is one of those things where you have to ask yourself: what took it so long?!
        Upcoming? I remember using that in 4.2 already.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by curaga View Post
          Upcoming? I remember using that in 4.2 already.
          No. You are thinking of the the "-march=" switch. I am talking about something new. A configure option to set the default.
          Last edited by sdack; 08-26-2014, 05:30 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            C: -Wno-incompatible-pointer-types

            Hopefully it'll finally catch broken void **/void * conversions.

            - Gilboa
            DEV: Intel S2600C0, 2xE52658V2, 32GB, 4x2TB + 2x3TB, GTX780, F21/x86_64, Dell U2711.
            SRV: Intel S5520SC, 2xX5680, 36GB, 4x2TB, GTX550, F21/x86_64, Dell U2412..
            BACK: Tyan Tempest i5400XT, 2xE5335, 8GB, 3x1.5TB, 9800GTX, F21/x86-64.
            LAP: ASUS N56VJ, i7-3630QM, 16GB, 1TB, 635M, F21/x86_64.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by sdack View Post
              No. You are thinking of the the "-march=" switch. I am talking about something new. A configure option to set the default.
              Yes, I am talking about compile-time minimum cpu setting.

              Comment


              • #8
                To be extra clear: GCC's compile-time minimum cpu setting.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Exhibit A: a commit from 2003 mentioning the configure option.

                  http://repo.or.cz/w/official-gcc.git...7a5ba9027aff9c

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by curaga View Post
                    Exhibit A: a commit from 2003 mentioning the configure option.

                    http://repo.or.cz/w/official-gcc.git...7a5ba9027aff9c
                    Interesting. I have not seen the option before 4.10.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Dear Michael Larabel,

                      While a subscriber of the site's RSS feed for some time, I'm now sick and tired of your insincere, bad, unethical, tabloid journalism.

                      The clickbait titles, the 'slow news days' with noise in my RSS unread box, the internal links to tags needing hovering to sort from links of ACTUAL RELEVANCE.

                      Since despite many people voicing similar opinion as this one, you continue your attempts at "journalism" without taking feedback into account. I'm disappointled since it's the only site of that particularity of OSS news, so can either live with the flaws, or lose information on the subject matter.

                      But now I'm tired of it, and of you.

                      cheers,
                      -sh

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by sthalik View Post
                        Dear Michael Larabel,

                        While a subscriber of the site's RSS feed for some time, I'm now sick and tired of your insincere, bad, unethical, tabloid journalism.

                        The clickbait titles, the 'slow news days' with noise in my RSS unread box, the internal links to tags needing hovering to sort from links of ACTUAL RELEVANCE.

                        Since despite many people voicing similar opinion as this one, you continue your attempts at "journalism" without taking feedback into account. I'm disappointled since it's the only site of that particularity of OSS news, so can either live with the flaws, or lose information on the subject matter.

                        But now I'm tired of it, and of you.

                        cheers,
                        -sh
                        With all due respect, it is only a web site and nothing to get angry about. Sure, one can and one should suggest improvements, but at the same time while you have figured out that it is lacking a bit behind in professionalism, how can you there expect them to care for the wakefulness of your mind? You are simply asking for too much.

                        The many self-references in the article makes it look insincere, but the article does contain actual news, too. It is therefore not as bad as you may think it is and no real harm is being done here. It is simply not as good as it could be. It does not make it bad, but only you have lost your reference point. For the same reason do I also see no moral dilemma here to call it unethical. The self-references are at best too much information for those who read here frequently. Well, and to call it tabloid journalism would you need to show that they are doing it to blur and to obscure facts, which I am not seeing being done here either.

                        What would have been nice, and this is a different matter, is how well the compiler does in its current state. It is one thing to recite the Changes file, another to criticise the actual development. The later requires a whole lot of knowledge over compilers, standards, testing and who is being affected it. It sure is not something one can scribble up in a summer hole.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          sdack wrote:
                          > With all due respect, it is only a web site and nothing to get angry about

                          Of course. Are you implying that i'm angry because of rss unsubscription of the site? For the record, that's not the case.

                          > You are simply asking for too much.

                          No, no. This is all the bare minimum for a 'news site' considered remotely respectable. The same's implicitly "fulfilled" by many random blogs that are on my RSS list.

                          > It does not make it bad, but only you have lost your reference point.

                          No. I haven't lost one. My field of work, expertise, remotely a hobby, requires me to stay up to date with new gimmicks. Kernel changes are something I might want to backport to my phone, similarly.

                          Reddit and HN aren't _as_ deceptive and annoying in their clickbait, 'slow news days', etc.

                          > I also see no moral dilemma here to call it unethical.

                          In the context of journalism, that's by the implied standard procedures of what journalism is, whether amateur or licensed.

                          > Well, and to call it tabloid journalism would you need to show that they are doing it to blur and to obscure facts, which I am not seeing being done here either.

                          It's not unmarked internal references that made me consider Phoronix a tabloid, I haven't said that.

                          For the purpose of tabloiditude of Phoronix, things to point out:

                          - clickbait
                          - intrusive ads, especially on mobile
                          - sometimes stories about drama on LKML et al. given weight (any, at all, really), instead of stuff that's relevant
                          - lack of rigor and misleading simplification in technical news. They're either abridged copy-pastes or paraphrasing without knowing enough techically, by the submitter, to paraphrase without actually skewing facts _TOWARD_ the territory of Fox News debate of evolution. Not that it's in the Fox News territory, but mlarabel lacks technical expertise on _some_ technical subjects he emits words on.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by sthalik View Post
                            Dear Michael Larabel,

                            While a subscriber of the site's RSS feed for some time, I'm now sick and tired of your insincere, bad, unethical, tabloid journalism.

                            The clickbait titles, the 'slow news days' with noise in my RSS unread box, the internal links to tags needing hovering to sort from links of ACTUAL RELEVANCE.

                            Since despite many people voicing similar opinion as this one, you continue your attempts at "journalism" without taking feedback into account. I'm disappointled since it's the only site of that particularity of OSS news, so can either live with the flaws, or lose information on the subject matter.

                            But now I'm tired of it, and of you.

                            cheers,
                            -sh
                            Funny that you have so much criticism towards Phoronix, and yet you chose to soil a thread about GCC 5.0 with completely OT messages.
                            DEV: Intel S2600C0, 2xE52658V2, 32GB, 4x2TB + 2x3TB, GTX780, F21/x86_64, Dell U2711.
                            SRV: Intel S5520SC, 2xX5680, 36GB, 4x2TB, GTX550, F21/x86_64, Dell U2412..
                            BACK: Tyan Tempest i5400XT, 2xE5335, 8GB, 3x1.5TB, 9800GTX, F21/x86-64.
                            LAP: ASUS N56VJ, i7-3630QM, 16GB, 1TB, 635M, F21/x86_64.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Whatever your sense of humor might be, I fail to see your point.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X