This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] clarify documentation of -Q --help=optimizers
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Martin Sebor <msebor at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Alexander Monakov <amonakov at ispras dot ru>, Gcc Patch List <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 18:47:19 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] clarify documentation of -Q --help=optimizers
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <56299713 dot 6040204 at gmail dot com> <562997A9 dot 3090203 at gmail dot com> <alpine dot LNX dot 2 dot 20 dot 1511031309390 dot 3529 at monopod dot intra dot ispras dot ru> <563A9A31 dot 5060306 at gmail dot com> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1511050053500 dot 18787 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <alpine dot LNX dot 2 dot 20 dot 1511051343310 dot 10819 at monopod dot intra dot ispras dot ru> <563B7CA1 dot 6080801 at gmail dot com> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1511051707030 dot 26133 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <563B960E dot 20508 at gmail dot com> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1511051806400 dot 26133 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <563BA3A6 dot 2090307 at gmail dot com>
On Thu, 5 Nov 2015, Martin Sebor wrote:
> Yes, I agree that printing "disabled by -O0" when -fexceptions is
> explicitly enabled on the command line is not right if the option
> isn't actually affected by -O0. This would be prevented if we knew
> which of the -fxxx options are or aren't controlled by -O0. Can you
> help identify them?
I don't think there's any simple way to do so; it requires checking all
the "if (optimize)" conditions to see what is or is not conditioned that
way.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com