This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: organization of optimization options in manual
- From: Gary Funck <gary at intrepid dot com>
- To: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Sandra Loosemore <sandra at codesourcery dot com>, GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2015 06:34:04 -0800
- Subject: Re: organization of optimization options in manual
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <54B70059 dot 3030808 at codesourcery dot com> <54B736E8 dot 70406 at redhat dot com> <54B75A61 dot 5070102 at codesourcery dot com> <54B75B1F dot 3070308 at redhat dot com>
On 01/14/15 23:15:59, Jeff Law wrote:
> Sounds good. I think just starting with the list & creating the buckets
> with the list. Then post here and we'll iterate and try to nail that down
> before you start moving everything in the .texi file.
Something to consider, if the optimization options are re-worked:
Arrange the -O options such that -O1 can be described by a
distinct set of specific optimizations enabled (or disabled)
in addition to -O0, and -O2 would be described as a composite
of specific optimizations applied to -O1 and so on. (This
might require the addition of new optimization options.)
For completeness, if a specific optimization requires
certain passes or the assertion of other options, that should
somehow be encoded internally within the compiler.
This would potentially make it easier to find which optimization
(or pass) is causing a regression and might make it easier
for users to understand the exact effect of a particular -O option.