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: "Experimental" features in releases


This has been very enlightening information.

Is it documented anywhere which gcc features should not be trusted or are known to have faults?

Regards,
Ivan

Richard Guenther wrote:
On 4/18/06, Ivan Novick <ivan@0x4849.net> wrote:

I am a gcc user at a fininancial institution and IMHO it would not be a
good idea to have non-production ready functionality in gcc.  We are
trying to use gcc for mission critical functionality.


It has been always the case that additional options not enabled with
any regular -O level gets less testing and more likely has bugs.  So for
mission critical functionality I would strongly suggest to stay with -O2
and not try to rely on not thoroughly tested combinations of optimization
options.

So from my point of view, the situation with -ftree-loop-linear is
fine - it's ICEing after all, not producing silently wrong-code.  For
experimental options (where
I would include all options not enabled by -O[123s]) known wrong-code bugs
should be fixed.

That's my 2c,
Richard.


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