This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] PR c++/27574 (PING)
- From: Dodji Seketeli <dodji at redhat dot com>
- To: Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- Cc: jh at suse dot cz, Gcc Patch List <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>
- Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2008 14:53:14 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] PR c++/27574 (PING)
- References: <48C056E3.email@example.com> <48DA9B09.firstname.lastname@example.org> <48DCDAA5.email@example.com> <48DD597D.firstname.lastname@example.org> <20080926215724.GB746@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <48E24B64.email@example.com> <48EA68F0.firstname.lastname@example.org> <48EA92AA.email@example.com> <48EDAD24.firstname.lastname@example.org> <490EDFBF.email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Richard Guenther a écrit :
Hm. What is the effect on text size for C++ applications?
Well, I don't have any hard figures for that, but I suspect that as the
only the bodies of abstract functions which clones are reachable (and
thus which bodies are emitted) are now being added, the text size might
grow only very slightly.
In any case, I am rebuilding/installing a gcc tree here so that I can
compile some c++ programs of mine to come up with some data.
We do not need the function text itself but only its debug information - the debug
information for the decl, not the text, correct?
I think for a function decl, we "only" need DECL_ARGUMENTS (decl) and
DECL_INITIAL (decl) to be present so that we can generate debug info.