This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Combine location with block using block_locations
- From: Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- To: Mike Stump <mikestump at comcast dot net>
- Cc: Robert Dewar <dewar at adacore dot com>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, Dehao Chen <dehao at google dot com>, Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google dot com>, Michael Matz <matz at suse dot de>, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google dot com>, Dodji Seketeli <dodji at redhat dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>, Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>, Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>, Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 08:49:03 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Combine location with block using block_locations
- References: <CAO2gOZV8SP-sOVEJBEsvF+M3yiKwtw7yWarfhZ1xeCVYjE_7KA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LNX.2.00.1209111728160.9940@wotan.suse.de> <CAO2gOZU0v3TeuLDLN02OCVPOht7JYg+tGU=UEJEdN_42fGFsTw@mail.gmail.com> <CAO2gOZWkn99pRrdp=0YjujpJvdtWXXq7LTRghU1+Ujq7E1ZoXg@mail.gmail.com> <CAFiYyc1Jb0ya49ny17c83sok_t3J4M9oN-K0G5-yTP=a+EVkwA@mail.gmail.com> <CAAkRFZ+CX3475JCSzqTspfqhkH363VJLUE1OVq5gsDrFpudu4w@mail.gmail.com> <CAO2gOZWMwDGLXXZ1oyd5Hiqvb9uJmUs+ZLAzhEanyvaF8Lvj=w@mail.gmail.com> <CAO2gOZWKDceuDo_pdxvn4-9o0SdEvaNSVHjJ-sJwp56GqnD=oA@mail.gmail.com> <CAFiYyc2te+pKYOzYV1aGusQB=R_onBAa+LeQ=muZUxgmOA0CSA@mail.gmail.com> <5051E0A0.4050702@adacore.com> <20120913133843.GD22619@tucnak.redhat.com> <5051E50A.7000700@adacore.com> <A12F5137-9D4F-4B35-9260-4B3E8278FC5F@comcast.net>
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 7:37 PM, Mike Stump <mikestump@comcast.net> wrote:
> On Sep 13, 2012, at 6:52 AM, Robert Dewar <dewar@adacore.com> wrote:
>> Sure, it is obvious that you don't want -g to affect -O1 or -O2 code,
>> but I think if you have -Og (if and when we have that), it would not
>> be a bad thing for -g to affect that.
>
> No, instead think of -Og as affecting the -g output itself. If it does, then there is nothing for -g to affect when used with -Og. So, I agree, -g -Og can have any impact on code-gen that we want, I just dis-agree that -Og should be any different; I just don't see the need.
I think it's going to make GCC harder to maintain if we drop the -g0
vs. -g no-code-difference requirement for just some optimization
levels.
Richard.