This is the mail archive of the 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: Link-time optimzation

Richard Henderson wrote:

In general, I'm going to just collect comments in a folder for a while,
and then try to reply once the dust has settled a bit.  I'm interested
in seeing where things go, and my primary interest is in getting *some*
consensus, independent of a particular one.

But, I'll try to answer this:

> In Requirement 4, you say that the function F from input files a.o and
> b.o should still be named F in the output file.  Why is this requirement
> more than simply having the debug information reflect that both names
> were originally F?  I see you go to some length in section 3 to ensure
> actual symbol table duplicates, and I don't know why.

Our understanding was that the debugger actually uses the symbol table,
in addition to the debugging information, in some cases.  (This must be
true when not running with -g, but I thought it was true in other cases
as well.)  It might be true for other tools, too.

It's true that, from a correctness or code-generation point of view, it
shouldn't matter, so, for non-GNU assemblers, we could fall back to
F.0/F.1, etc.

> The rest of the requirements look good.  I cannot immediately think of
> anything you've forgotten.


Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
(916) 791-8304

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