[Zlib-devel] zlib-1.2.5 DLL build

[Cosmin Truta]

On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 5:50 PM, Gilles Vollant <info at winimage.com> wrote:
> I still think an asm enabled version can be useful, and compare speed with a
> version compiled with Visual Studio 2010 and all optimization (including
> profile guided optimization)

Have the gcc-asm modules been updated at the same time with the VC-asm
modules? How confident are you that they are equally bug-free?

> have we a visual studio projet (not makefile only, but a .vcproj) which is
> binary compatible, and an executable which is able to test your binary DLL
> (or 100% compatible) with performance indication?

The MinGW build should be 100% binary compatible with the VC build,
provided, of course, that the VC build is compatible to MSVCRT.DLL.

> the "686" optimisation is still useful for modern processor, but it can be
> useful do measurement

In addition to the correctness issues, I'd still like to know how much
faster (if it is faster at all) is the 686 optimization?
IIRC the asm686 deflation module was written about 10 years ago.
Compilers have gone long way since then. So how does a 10-year-old
hand-written asm code compare to the C code compiled by a 3-month-old
compiler like gcc-4.5?

I'll post an asm-enabled build, later today, or maybe tomorrow.

Best regards,
Cosmin