Joel VanderWerf wrote:
> Hugh Sasse wrote:
> 
>>My active record based script is taking longer than I'd like.
>>While I wait for approval to get a faster machine :-) I'm wondering
>>about rebuilding ruby 1.8.2 (which I have now) and changing the
>>CFLAGS from the default 
>>CFLAGS=-g -O2
>>to 
>>CFLAGS=-O3
>>or something of the sort.  I'm presently using gcc-3.4.3 on
>>Solaris9.  Has anyone done this and if so is there anything I should
>>watch out for?  ISTR reported problems when building other packages
>>with high -O values in the past. 
>>
>>Would the answer be different for gcc-4.0.2?
> 
> 
> If gcc-4.x is an option, try it. Anecdotally, it's substantially faster
> than 3.x. In fact, it's one less reason for me to use msvc on windows:
> code compiled with gcc-4.0 (with -O2) turns out to be faster than msvc
> for some numerically intensive simulation code running as a ruby
> extension, whereas msvc was faster than gcc-3.x output code. YMMV.
> 

Just out of curiosity, what options did you pass to cl when using MSVC?

- Dan