This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug other/53316] Introduce -Odebug
- From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 08:58:23 +0000
- Subject: [Bug other/53316] Introduce -Odebug
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-53316-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53316
--- Comment #8 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-05-11 08:58:23 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > A big question for -Odebug is e.g. if we should enable var-tracking for it or
> > not. While it is time consuming, it should improve the debug experience, there
> > are various cases where -O -g is actually better debuggable than -O0 -g which
> > doesn't do var-tracking, e.g. with register vars, or VLAs, or during
> > prologues/epilogues.
>
> Well, -Odebug should aid debugging, so yes, we should enable var-tracking for
> it (we can throttle the limiting --params more if compile-time is going to be
> an issue). Of course we should evaluate the actual benefit of
> var-tracking for -Odebug when it materializes.
Btw, my personal goal is to make -Odebug a good default for my GCC development
tree (which currently sits at -O0 -g) - I suppose for that particular case
var-tracking isn't that important, but I will definitely notice if there is
a difference ;)