Lord Isildur wrote:

[whinewhinewhine]

> now, as for slow code vs clow compile, when im developing, i find i do 
> much less running of the code than i do wquick test, kill it, edit, 
> recompile. waiting for long compiles is extremely frusrating, and i dont 

Well, I'd say it's your own fault if you use something as glacier-slow
as an old VAX for active software development...  there's not much sense
in blaming modern compilers here.  gcc is slow but is rather moderate in
memory consumption.  For contrast, HP's compiler is about 2-3x as fast
as gcc but happily eats 20+ megs of memory for even simple programs when
optimizations are enabled.  There's always a speed/space tradeoff.  I'm
quite sure that people wouldn't want a gcc that eats 20-30 megs of
memory on their 8MB VAX either...

--mkb