[LLVMdev] Google's Go

[Jon Harrop]

On Thursday 19 November 2009 19:48:18 Owen Anderson wrote:
> On Nov 19, 2009, at 10:25 AM, Jon Harrop wrote:
> >> In this case, the assertion that LLVM is slow is correct: it's
> >> definitely slower than a non-optimizing compiler.
> >
> > I'm *very* surprised by this and will test it myself...

I've tested it and LLVM is indeed 2x slower to compile, although it generates 
code that is 2x faster to run...

> Compared to a compiler in the same category as PCC, whose pinnacle of
> optimization is doing register allocation?  I'm not surprised at all.

What else does LLVM do with optimizations turned off that makes it slower?

-- 
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e