Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 26 May 1999 15:27:52 -0700
From:      Scott Michel <scottm@cs.ucla.edu>
To:        "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com>
Cc:        current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: More compiler option comparisons 
Message-ID:  <199905262227.PAA17737@mordred.cs.ucla.edu>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 25 May 1999 21:34:34 PDT." <000001bea731$0e713990$021d85d1@whenever.youwant.to> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I don't recall that the FreeBSD version of egcs is built with Haifa
turned on, which is supposed to improve optimizations as the level
is increased (more aggressive instruction scheduling.)

> 	With egcs, the '-O' flag doesn't specify the optimization level like it
> does in GCC. It specifies the desired stability of the generated code. Lower
> numbers (0,1,2) request higher stability. ;)
> 
> 	DS
> 
> > Dan Nelson wrote:
> > > -O4 doesn't exist in egcs (or it didn't a month or so ago).  According
> > > to the source, -O2 enables all optimizations except -funroll-all-loops,
> > > and all -O3 does is enable -funroll-all-loops.
> >
> > I think I recall reading somewhere that EGCS uses -O numbers > 3 to test
> > experimental optimizations.



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199905262227.PAA17737>