Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 22 Mar 2000 16:30:07 -0800
From:      Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
To:        Brad Knowles <blk@skynet.be>
Cc:        obrien@FreeBSD.ORG, Howard Leadmon <howardl@account.abs.net>, freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Compiler problems with -O2 (was Re: CVS Trouble, even under 4.0-RELEASE (alpha) HELP!)
Message-ID:  <20000322163007.D21029@fw.wintelcom.net>
In-Reply-To: <v04220803b4ff04459dcb@[194.78.238.239]>; from blk@skynet.be on Thu, Mar 23, 2000 at 12:16:43AM %2B0100
References:  <14552.58589.119082.742615@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <200003222003.PAA51043@account.abs.net> <20000322130901.A97411@dragon.nuxi.com> <v04220803b4ff04459dcb@[194.78.238.239]>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Brad Knowles <blk@skynet.be> [000322 16:15] wrote:
> At 1:09 PM -0800 2000/3/22, David O'Brien wrote:
> 
> >  I'm on the virge of turning off "-O2" on both Alpha and i386.
> 
> 	Cool!  Can I put in -O39696943125454932 and you'll save me from 
> myself on that, too?  ;-)
> 
> 
> 	Seriously, I have to wonder why people can't take the 
> recommendation that you should use nothing more than -O, and that 
> anything more is only likely to increase your probability of 
> crashing, toasting the system, etc....
> 
> 	I'm sorry, at best here we're talking a few tenths of a 
> percentage point of increased speed (if that), and maybe a few 
> milliseconds saved -- right?

Actually the difference between -O and -O2 the times i've looked
at the generated code was substantial, but I guess that brings 
along complexity that still needs to be worked out. :(

-Alfred


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




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000322163007.D21029>