Re: Why no strings in error messages?

[Michael Meissner <meissner at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>]

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 06:30:44AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Bradley Lucier <lucier@math.purdue.edu> writes:
> 
> > I've never seen the answer to the following question:  Why do some
> > versions of gcc that I build not have string substitutions in error
> > messages?
> 
> Perhaps you configured with --disable-intl?
> 
> 
> > So, is -fschedule-insns an option to be avoided?
> 
> -fschedule-insns should be avoided on Intel architectures.  In general
> -fschedule-insns tends to increase register lifespan, and because of the
> small number of available registers this can sometimes befuddle the
> register allocator, especially when asm instructions as used.

When I worked at AMD, I was starting to suspect that it may be more beneficial
to re-enable the first schedule insns pass if you were compiling in 64-bit
mode, since you have more registers available, and the new registers do not
have hard wired uses, which in the past always meant a lot of spills (also, the
default floating point unit is SSE instead of the x87 stack).  I never got
around to testing this before AMD and I parted company.

> On PPC -fschedule-insns is normally beneficial, and it is turned on by
> -O2.
> 
> Ian

-- 
Michael Meissner, IBM
4 Technology Place Drive, MS 2203A, Westford, MA, 01886, USA
meissner@linux.vnet.ibm.com