This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Getting rid of -fno-unit-at-a-time [Was Re: RFC: Preserving orderof functions and top-level asms via cgraph]


Nathan Sidwell writes:
 > Andrew Haley wrote:
 > > Nathan Sidwell writes:
 > 
 > >  > 1) The C++ programs are smaller than the java programs
 > > 
 > > That's my guess.  Usually, C++ users compile one source file at a
 > > time, whereas Java users find it convenient to compile a whole
 > > archive.
 > ok, thanks.  This sounds like you're really in an IMA mode :) If I
 > understand java archives correctly, they're really a set of concatenated
 > TUs, so could be compiled individually and then having a final link.

Yes.

 > That would more naturally match other language's uses of the toolchain.

 > you'd like the backend to handle the breaking appart bit (by preserving
 > no-unit-at-a-time).  I think that's merely pushing the complexity out
 > of the java FE and into the backend.

Sure, it is, yes.  But it has hitherto been a very convenient way to
work.

Andrew.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]