Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 7 Mar 2001 10:56:59 -0800 (PST)
From:      Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com>
To:        Glen Gross <ggross@symark.com>
Cc:        Steven Farmer <steve@megahack.com>, "freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG" <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   Re: RE: ARCH flag in new make.conf
Message-ID:  <200103071856.f27Iuxl71513@earth.backplane.com>
References:   <01C0A6F1.C26E6DC0.ggross@symark.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:The impression I get is that when people use it, they usually end up 
:complaining to the list about something not working, and then it is
:not immediately obvious that broken optimization routines are the problem.  On 
:the basis of a dialogue I read about 6 months ago on this list,
:I decided to avoid it like the plague until the current version of gcc 
:stabilizes somewhat.  Does that make sense, or am I being overly cautious?

    I think you are being entirely sensible.   I used to use -O2 all the time,
    but as of about a year ago it started breaking things (starting with
    the FreeBSD kernel).  Then I started using -Os because I like the code
    compaction it produced, but that started breaking the kernel too.  Now I
    just use -O (and -O had damn well better continue to work because my
    static inlines will not compile properly without it!).

    Now I just don't care any more, except for the 0.1% of my personal code
    that I need to optimize, and most of that I optimize simply by playing
    around with the C a little or changing an algorithm out or something like
    that.

						-Matt

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?200103071856.f27Iuxl71513>