From owner-freebsd-current Fri Sep 24 1:50: 6 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from not.demophon.com (ns.demophon.com [193.65.70.13]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97F7515925 for ; Fri, 24 Sep 1999 01:50:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from will@not.demophon.com) Received: (from will@localhost) by not.demophon.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) id LAA05341; Fri, 24 Sep 1999 11:49:29 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from will) To: "Daniel C. Sobral" Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: gcc optimizer in -current system ... References: <37EAEB1A.3B0E4263@newsguy.com.newsgate.clinet.fi> From: Ville-Pertti Keinonen Date: 24 Sep 1999 11:49:28 +0300 In-Reply-To: "Daniel C. Sobral"'s message of "24 Sep 1999 10:10:40 +0300" Message-ID: <86yadwvgmf.fsf@not.demophon.com> Lines: 20 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.5/XEmacs 20.4 - "Emerald" Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG "Daniel C. Sobral" writes: > bsd@picard.mandrakesoft.de wrote: > > > > But specifying something too high (-O99) doesn't hurt - I'm using -O6 for > > gcc 2.95.1 (which, by the way, compiles almost everything in 3.3-RELEASE > > and 4.0-CURRENT, the only thing still troubling me with it is the kernel). > > The point is that it _does_ hurt. Anything above -O3 is _likely_ to > have bugs. That only applies to pgcc, which shouldn't be used as anything other than an experimental compiler, anyhow. Whether real future gcc versions will enable new optimizations at levels > 3 is, to my knowledge, an open question. I don't like the thought myself, because -O3 already includes an often undesirable optimization (automatic inlining). To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message