Need some opinions

[Lars Albertsson]

Alexandre Oliva <oliva@dcc.unicamp.br> writes:

> On Mar  4, 1999, Jeffrey A Law <law@hurl.cygnus.com> wrote:
> 
> >> > Another would be to rearrange the meaning of -O1, -O2, -O3, etc to make
> >> > space for a -O1 option which did just these simple optimizations.
> 
> >> No way. -O2 et al are widely entrenched by now (for better or worse).
> > I suspect this is the case.  And it is definitely for the worse IMHO.
> 
> How about -O.5 ? :-)

How about denoting optimisation level by name rather than by number?
If you introduce -Onone, -Osome, -Oalmost-all, etc, as aliases to -On
and people eventually start using it, you could insert new levels in
between without changing expected behaviour.

/Lalle