Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 21:34:34 -0700 From: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com> To: "obituary" <c9710216@atlas.newcastle.edu.au> Cc: <current@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: More compiler option comparisons Message-ID: <000001bea731$0e713990$021d85d1@whenever.youwant.to> In-Reply-To: <374B7669.E8463ABF@atlas.newcastle.edu.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
With egcs, the '-O' flag doesn't specify the optimization level like it does in GCC. It specifies the desired stability of the generated code. Lower numbers (0,1,2) request higher stability. ;) DS > Dan Nelson wrote: > > -O4 doesn't exist in egcs (or it didn't a month or so ago). According > > to the source, -O2 enables all optimizations except -funroll-all-loops, > > and all -O3 does is enable -funroll-all-loops. > > I think I recall reading somewhere that EGCS uses -O numbers > 3 to test > experimental optimizations. > > -jake (obituary) Powered by FreeBSD > c9710216@atlas.newcastle.edu.au http://www.freebsd.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?000001bea731$0e713990$021d85d1>