Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 16:30:07 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> To: Brad Knowles <blk@skynet.be> Cc: 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 under 4.0-RELEASE (alpha) HELP!) Message-ID: <20000322163007.D21029@fw.wintelcom.net> In-Reply-To: <v04220803b4ff04459dcb@[194.78.238.239]>; from blk@skynet.be on Thu, Mar 23, 2000 at 12:16:43AM %2B0100 References: <14552.58589.119082.742615@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <200003222003.PAA51043@account.abs.net> <20000322130901.A97411@dragon.nuxi.com> <v04220803b4ff04459dcb@[194.78.238.239]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Brad Knowles <blk@skynet.be> [000322 16:15] wrote: > At 1:09 PM -0800 2000/3/22, David O'Brien wrote: > > > I'm on the virge of turning off "-O2" on both Alpha and i386. > > Cool! Can I put in -O39696943125454932 and you'll save me from > myself on that, too? ;-) > > > Seriously, I have to wonder why people can't take the > recommendation that you should use nothing more than -O, and that > anything more is only likely to increase your probability of > crashing, toasting the system, etc.... > > I'm sorry, at best here we're talking a few tenths of a > percentage point of increased speed (if that), and maybe a few > milliseconds saved -- right? Actually the difference between -O and -O2 the times i've looked at the generated code was substantial, but I guess that brings along complexity that still needs to be worked out. :( -Alfred 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?20000322163007.D21029>