final intermodule patch

[Geoff Keating]

> X-Original-To: geoffk@foam.wonderslug.com
> Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 11:26:16 -0400
> Cc: geoffk@geoffk.org
> Content-Disposition: inline
> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i
> From: Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com>
> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Jul 2003 15:25:45.0921 (UTC) FILETIME=[3241AB10:01C34A1C]
> 
> Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> >Geoff,
> >I think the command line option handling for the (excellent) 
> >intermodule mode is wrong.
> >
> >        gcc -c file1.c file2.c
> >gets me separate file1.o and file2.o objects.
> >        gcc -c file1.c file2.c -o foo.o
> >gets me intermodule work. Yet I've not changed any *optimization*
> >option.
> >
> >I'd guess users (we should canvas some) would think of intermodule 
> >stuff as an optimization, and be surprised that it is not triggered by 
> >a -O level (say -O4?) or a -fintermodule flag
> 
> I agree strongly with this.  The current behavior is non-intuitive; 
> intermodule optimization is certainly what I think of as a 
> serious optimization, which should be off definitely at -O0 and -O1, 
> probably at -O2, and maybe even at -O3.

Good, because that's what happens now.

-- 
- Geoffrey Keating <geoffk@geoffk.org>