|
This thread is locked; no one can reply to it. |
1
2
|
Super slow MinGW |
aybabtu
Member #2,891
November 2002
|
Hey! I like MinGW, but only on our "good" computer. I transfered all files to my "programming" computer, which is a crappy 586 from '95. I tried compiling a hello.cpp program to test it, but it took >30 minutes to do so! There's only like 6 lines of code! Anyway, I decided maybe that if I want to use MinGW on this computer, I'll have to get an older version. I have 3.2. Is this a newish version? If so, where could I get an older one? (You know, so it'll run better on an older computer?) |
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
If you use templates or the STL, GCC 3.* will take longer than 2.95.*.. But then, 2.95.* doesn't support namespaces, and likely a few other C++ standard features. 3.2-3.3 is an allaround better compiler, if you can ignore its slowness. edit: IIRC, even just using cin/cout is using templates, as the file stream stuff is based on basic_char<> or something like that somewhere along the line. edit2: :O 30min? I misread.. I thought you said 30sec... Not sure whats going on... -- |
Plucky
Member #1,346
May 2001
|
30 minutes is a long time for only 6 lines of code. That's probably about 1000x slower than standard computers these days. On my old P2-300 laptop running MinGW 2.0/gcc 3.1, I don't recall noticing any significant slow down. Maybe I should check whether it really uses gcc 3.1. |
aybabtu
Member #2,891
November 2002
|
On our "good" computer (233 mhz), it only takes about 10 seconds. My parents don't like me programming on the family computer, so I'm trying to move all my programming stuff to my own computer. My Djgpp (on my old crappy comp) gcc is only version 2.2, but I suppose it doesn't matter. |
Johnny13
Member #805
October 2000
|
w0w the Aybabtu is back!! Cmon download the Fparty03!:P anyway i think the compile time is not depends on the version,but your Harddisk! due to includes and libs..on my 1.7ghz,the newest allegro 4112wip compiled in 3min or so. aybabtu said: 11/2 My 3D Shooting game engine! Quotes:no screenshot,no download! nyah! Alg3D Praise my Games!!<code>#define SPAMMER (post>=666&&postperday>=6)</code><Mr.spellcaster>What post? <Mr.spellcaster>A useful post by me. |
Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
|
Not likely the drive. 586 implies that it's at least 100mhz right? That's gotta compile faster than that. It doesn't happen to have like 4mb of RAM, and you're running Windows 95? I'd suggest use DJGPP, but keep MinGW in mind when programming.. unless you need the Win32 API or something. "He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe" |
Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
|
Or it's 99% fragmented. Allegro compiled in less then 30 minutes on my 486-100mhz. Somethings got to be really strange going on. -----sig: |
Kitty Cat
Member #2,815
October 2002
|
FYI, DJGPP will run faster than MinGW. At least with the version of DJGPP I have. Mainly because MinGW is nicer about giving up the CPU, whereas DOS apps usually take all they can get. Especially in Win9x. -- |
the_y_man
Member #1,770
December 2001
|
update your system, maybe even reformat it or defrag it, uninstall your programming stuff, reinstall it, and hope that nasty bug disapears. |
LSd016
Member #3,561
May 2003
|
There is an option in gcc which makes the compiler display the current funtion being compiled. Look for it in documentation(i dont remember it rite now), maybe it will reveal the point at which the biggest slowdown occurs. ____________________________________________ |
aybabtu
Member #2,891
November 2002
|
Johnny13: It's not in the left bar? (Under "Games-->"?) Derezo: 90MHz, 8MB o' RAM, and Win95. I think I'll stick with DJGPP right now, until I can get a better computer of my own. |
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
8MB ?? I had a system that could barely run bash in linux with that little ram.. then it was a 386 but still I'm guessing it swaps the "Start" menu out every time you close it -- |
LSd016
Member #3,561
May 2003
|
then try running it in windows safe mode, to spare some memory. if you see a signifficant difference then TF has a point. My mother has a 16MB machine on win95, and it swaps nearly all the time. ____________________________________________ |
BAF
Member #2,981
December 2002
|
i can compile 6 lines in like 2 secs, 4-5 secs if it is with heavy c++/stl, on my p2 366 laptop. But on my desktop (k6-2/300) it takes more like 1-2 mins, same gcc same mingw, smae allegro. But the slowdown is only on c++. Allegro (debugginh, profiling, and release) compiled in about 45 mins on the k6-2. I notice the major slowdown when using g++. |
razor
Member #2,256
April 2002
|
hmmmm, well my crappy system is currrently compiling... slow slow slow, it only takes like 10min to open windows I'm dumb! (486, 8mg ram, 300mg hd, laptop...). Its running win98 and dev-cpp w/mingw32. I don't know what version, gotta let it finish compiling. I'll get back to you. Whoooo Oregon State University |
dudaskank
Member #561
July 2000
|
In my first computer (486 SX (after DX) 33 MHz with 8 MB RAM, 1 MB video and Win95) I can't even compile Allegro for windows... and compiling it with DJGPP take 2~4 hours! ^__^ Toque a balada do amor inabalável, eterna love song de nós dois |
razor
Member #2,256
April 2002
|
I'm dumb! my laptop took 2 hours to just find out I had a santax error! It was only something like this #include<iostream.h> //don't bother me about this int main() { int temp; cout << "Hello World" << endl; cout << "Input a number:"; cin >> temp; cout << endl << "You put in:" << temp << endl; return 0; } ha ha ha, now its trying to compile again (first time i forgot a ';'). EDIT: Whoooo Oregon State University |
Ron Ofir
Member #2,357
May 2002
|
GAH! 8 MB of RAM?!?! That's crazy! Go buy some if you want your poor computer not to burn becuase of swaping |
PyroBoy
Member #725
October 2000
|
My 486 66MHz can compile faster then that in windows . DJGPP or Mingw never took longer then about 5min's to compile an old game or 40min's for Allegro(3.12 or the 3.9.*WIP's). I did have 128Meg's of RAM though. Has anyone else noticed how slow GCC is on Windows or DOS compared to Linux?:P |
Ron Ofir
Member #2,357
May 2002
|
3.12?!?! I think your Allegro is a little bit outdated Actually, I lately found out that G++ became slow when running it through Dev-Cpp, I don't know why though. |
Evert
Member #794
November 2000
|
Quote: GAH! 8 MB of RAM?!?! That's crazy! Go buy some if you want your poor computer not to burn becuase of swaping I doubt you can still by memory for a system that old. Most computer stores won't have it in stock. Quote: 3.12?!?! I think your Allegro is a little bit outdated He didn't say he was using 3.12, he said it took 40 minutes to compile 3.12. Anyway, with 8MB of ram, you're probably better of running DJGPP instead of MinGW. Note that even when you compile programs, DirectX applications are going to eat up a lot of the system's resources on that system. |
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
Quote: Actually, I lately found out that G++ became slow when running it through Dev-Cpp, I don't know why though. The new G++ (Gcc 3.*) IS BLODDY ASS FUNKIN SLOW! I heard a theory. Each GCC developer added thier own optimization pass. -- |
Aali .
Member #3,867
September 2003
|
>PyroBoy: Has anyone else noticed how slow everything is on Windows or DOS compared to Linux? (compiling a gentoo linux kernel took less than 30 minutes on my P233, and thats like 50 meg code!) _______________________________ There is no spoon. Use a fork() |
Maverick
Member #2,337
May 2002
|
Quote: I doubt you can still by memory for a system that old. Most computer stores won't have it in stock. I have seen 72-pin EDO SIMMs here, though I can't for the life of me remember if standard SIMMs were EDO or not back then. (Heh, I almost feel spoiled now, with memory standards clearly marked by PCxxx numbers) Quote: The new G++ (Gcc 3.*) IS BLODDY donkey FUNKIN SLOW! I heard a theory. Each GCC developer added thier own optimization pass. Probably explains why RedHat still (to my knowledge) ships with a custom version of GCC 2.96. -Maverick ----- |
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
Quote: ships with a custom version of GCC 2.96. RedHat is still using that buggy pice of crap? 2.95 and 2.96 were/are RedHat isms. They were never a real release. They are just pre alpha's of 3.0... -- |
|
1
2
|