Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 08:46:55 +0900 From: "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com> To: Charles Cox <cscox@stanford.edu> Cc: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group <Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca>, Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu>, obrien@FreeBSD.ORG, Howard Leadmon <howardl@account.abs.net>, freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Compiler problems with -O2 (was Re: CVS Trouble, even under4.0-RELEASE (alpha) HELP!) Message-ID: <38DAACEF.1F55DF96@newsguy.com> References: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0003231108220.4480-100000@cardinal0.Stanford.EDU>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Charles Cox wrote:
>
> I would like to add that some of us who do a lot of numerically intensive
> programming, and that need to squeeze every last available cycle out of
> our CPU's would really appreciate having -O2 available for userland
> programs. To me, getting rid of the -O2+ switch would be like outlawing
> cars because someone had a really bad car accident. Just like driving a
> car, using gcc and the -O2 switch safely are the USER's
> responsibility. Having said this though, I do fully support having
> comments in make.conf, and documentation elsewhere that cautions against
> compiling a kernel with -O2.
Whatever. Remember, though, that compiling with -O2 *WILL* result in bad
code. It's not that someone had an accident. Is that the breaks don't
work one time out of five. Just wait your turn...
--
Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS)
dcs@newsguy.com
dcs@freebsd.org
capo@zurichgnomes.bsdconspiracy.net
One Unix to rule them all, One Resolver to find them,
One IP to bring them all and in the zone bind them.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?38DAACEF.1F55DF96>