Re: Patch: Enable tree-browser with --enable-checking

[Bryce McKinlay <mckinlay at redhat dot com>]

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).
> >
> > Rationale:
> >
> > - 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
> >    
>
> Hi Bryce,
>
>  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 
--enable-checking.

Regards

Bryce