This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Patch: Enable tree-browser with --enable-checking
- From: Bryce McKinlay <mckinlay at redhat dot com>
- To: Ranjit Mathew <rmathew at gmail dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 28 May 2004 11:05:13 -0400
- Subject: Re: Patch: Enable tree-browser with --enable-checking
- References: <40B5F103.email@example.com> <40B6D4E7.firstname.lastname@example.org>
Ranjit Mathew wrote:
Bryce McKinlay wrote:
This patch removes the --enable-tree-browser configure option, and
instead enables the tree browser when --enable-checking=tree is used
(this is the default for development builds).
- tree-browser.o adds only a very small size overhead (approx 20k
stripped or 0.5% of cc1's total size on i686)
- its a useful debugging feature
- it sucks to have to remember yet another configure option
- it sucks to have to reconfigure gcc when you just want to
browse_tree() during a debugging session
- conceptually it isn't much different from debug_tree and other
debugging routines that are always enabled
- without enabling it by default, most developers would not build the
tree-browser code, thus it can be subject to bit-rot
I would argue that Tree Browser be enabled at all
times and not just when "--enable-checking=tree". I for
one regularly bootstrap with "--disable-checking", as
otherwise the bootstraps are even more painful on my
relatively puny machine at home.
Can we please have Tree Browser enabled at all times?
We discussed this on IRC the other day (with Diego and others) and the
consensus then was to put it under --enable-checking. But I don't really
have an objection to enabling it at all times.
Does anyone object to enabling browse_tree() in all builds?
Perhaps as a compromise we could put the --enable-tree-browser option
back in, so that it gets enabled with either --enable-tree-browser or