"Richard" <rgrdev_@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:h0v39d$6pl$...
> user923005 <> writes:
>
>> On Jun 12, 6:11 am, Ioannis Vranos <ivra...@freemail.gr> wrote:
>>> I am new to application programming for Linux. Is there any good (GUI is
>>> better) profiler for Linux, except gprof?
>>
>> Did you try ddd, which is a Gui for gprof?
>> http://www.gnu.org/software/ddd/
>> More debuggers are listed at the end of this page.
>
> ddd is a gui for gdb amongst others. When did it include graphical
> support for gprof? Interesting. But ddd is not in itself a profiler.
>
>>
>> IMO, Eclipse + CDT + Intel compiler is hard to beat on Linux, but you
>> may not want to use a commercial compiler.
>
> Why use Intel as opposed to gcc?
>
I think the idea is that Intel's comiler does a little better at optimizing
than gcc...
partly, I think this may be due to the backend, where Intel can focus their
efforts on a limited number of archs (x86 and x86-64), whereas gcc tries to
more generically target a much larger number of archs. as such, it is likely
gcc makes use of fewer special-case optimizations than a compiler more
specialized for a particular arch, ...
similarly, it is likely the case that Intel has at their disposal a good
deal of information related to the deeper innards of the processor, whereas
gcc's developers are likely faced with much more general info (all which is
part of the documented instruction set, ...).
or, at least, these are just a few possibilities...
however:
gcc is free, commonly used, and comes with Linux, which probably more than
justifies its slightly worse code optimization...
>
> --
> "Avoid hyperbole at all costs, its the most destructive argument on
> the planet" - Mark McIntyre in comp.lang.c
Similar Threads
