This is the mail archive of the egcs@egcs.cygnus.com mailing list for the EGCS project. See the EGCS home page for more information.
> No, I heard more than that. Such as, the compiler may opt to make a function > into an inline based on optimization. Which scares the hell out of me, too. Get used to it; almost every compiler will do this at high levels of optimization. > The argument, though, should be telling you that basing a C compiler > front-end on top of a C++ engine is going to become more and more risky. It has nothing to do with C++. Fortran compilers are the most aggressive at doing major restructuring of this form. If anything, C++ compilers do *less* of it. The reason is the compiler writers are spending so much time getting the semantics right that they have no time to do much optimization. > There once was a time when there was a tight correlation between the C code > and the assembly. Turn off -O if you want that. > I like Per's comments about not being able to produce a compiler that behaves > like Linus would want. Would you be willing to accept 50% slower code for tighter control? (You could get the 50% back by personally directing every compiler transformation, but you'd have to get them all right and then redo them every time you change any of the code).