Getting rid of -fno-unit-at-a-time [Was Re: RFC: Preserving order of functions and top-level asms via cgraph]

[Andrew Haley]

Marcin Dalecki writes:
 > 
 > On 2005-04-11, at 14:01, Andrew Haley wrote:
 > 
 > > Nathan Sidwell writes:
 > >> Andrew Haley wrote:
 > >>> Nathan Sidwell writes:
 > >>>> Andrew Haley wrote:
 > >>>>
 > >>>>> Might it still be possible for a front end to force all pending 
 > >>>>> code
 > >>>>> to be generated, even with -fno-unit-at-a-time gone?
 > >>>>
 > >>>> I think this is a bad idea.  You're essentially asking for the 
 > >>>> backend
 > >>>> to retain all the functionality of -fno-unit-at-a-time.
 > >>>
 > >>> OK.  So, what else?
 > >> As steven asked, I'd like to understand why this is not a problem
 > >> for the C++ community.  There are several alternatives
 > >>
 > >> 1) The C++ programs are smaller than the java programs
 > >
 > > That's my guess.  Usually, C++ users compile one source file at a
 > > time, whereas Java users find it convenient to compile a whole
 > > archive.
 > 
 > If it is an archive the answer would be to change gcc.c to
 > recognize this and to let it compile the archive one item at a
 > time. (.jar).

Well, yes, but a) it would be slow, and b) the output is a .o file and
we'd have to find some portable way to link a bunch of .o files into
another .o.  'ld -r' works on some systems.

Andrew.