Re: abysmal code generated by gcc 3.2

[Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple dot com>]

On Tuesday, October 22, 2002, at 01:51  AM, Michael Matz wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Dale Johannesen wrote:
>
> > > > uh? except for max-inline-insns, I never heard of the others.  Are
> > > > these new (and what do they mean? - is that maybe documented in 
> > > > CVS).
> > > I'll assume all of these are documented in the manual,
> > No, they are not.  Perhaps the patch that added them
> >
> > 2002-04-27  Kurt Garloff <garloff@suse.de>
> >
> >          * tree-inline.c (inlinable_function_p): Improve heuristics
> >          by using a smoother function to cut down allowable inlinable
> > size.
> >          * param.def: Add parameters max-inline-insns-single,
> >          max-inline-slope, min-inline-insns that determine the exact
> >          shape of the above function.
> >          * param.h: Likewise.
> >
> > should be reverted until this is fixed.
> A little bit too harsh I would say.  The documentation (which Kurt 
> wrote)
> just wasn't committed for some reason (I believe another person than 
> Kurt
> actually committed the patch on Kurt's behalf).
> > (-fmax-inline-insns was broken at the same time so that it no longer
> > works to increase the size limit.)
Well, it is too harsh, and besides I believe the patch is generally a 
good
thing, but this has been broken for months and nobody seems to be 
interested
in fixing it.  How else can I get it to happen?  (It may not be just 
documentation,
depending on how you look at it; the functionality of 
-fmax-inline-insns is
changed, and no longer matches its documentation.  It's not clear this 
change in
functionality was approved; in general a change to the documented user 
interface
needs quite a good reason IMO, as it can screw up people with existing 
makefiles.)