This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Prague GCC folks meeting summary report
- From: Andi Kleen <andi at firstfloor dot org>
- To: Richard Guenther <rguenther at suse dot de>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 02:00:10 +0200
- Subject: Re: Prague GCC folks meeting summary report
- References: <alpine.LNX.2.00.0909241234100.4520@zhemvz.fhfr.qr>
Richard Guenther <rguenther@suse.de> writes:
>
> The wish for more granular and thus smaller debug information (things like
> -gfunction-arguments which would properly show parameter values
> for backtraces) was brought up. We agree that this should be addressed at a
> tools level, like in strip, not in the compiler.
Is that really the right level? In my experience (very roughly) -g can turn gcc from
CPU bound to IO bound (especially considering distributed compiling appraches),
and dropping unnecessary information in external tools would make the IO penalty even
worse.
-Andi
--
ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.