This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch] tree-cfg.c: Speed up cleanup_tree_cfg().
On Fri, 2004-10-01 at 20:52, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
> Andrew MacLeod wrote:
>
> > I'm willing to bet there are places where we slow down a release
> > compiler because we are performing a lot of assertions we thought we
> > were only doing with ENABLE_CHECKING. I certainly have written some.
> > bah.
>
> In the patches Nathan and I have been doing to convert GCC to gcc_assert, we
> always checked each and every abort line manually and used our own judgement
> about what is heavy and what is not. Of course, I can do (and probably have
> done) mistakes, but stay sure it was not a mechanical change.
>
My concern is, actually, new code. I was also under the impression that
gcc_assert was a nop in released compilers. We should have a bigger
warning sign. What may be today a cheap check, may silently become an
expensive one in the future (e.g., verify_ssa used to be fairly
lightweight).
I guess that a rule of thumb could be "no function calls in gcc_assert
without ENABLE_CHECKING guards". I hope this is documented?
Diego.