In the last episode (Sep 23), [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> On Thu, 23 Sep 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> > I tend not to like the higher optimization levels because they
> > cause the compiler to attempt to turn static functions into inlines
> > and, in my opinion, it doesn't do a very good job of selecting
> > which functions to convert. The result is that I see bloated
> > binaries with no performance gain to show for it.
> >
> > EGCS's -Os is my favorite.
>
> Have you tried specifying -O6 and -Os (With -Os following -O6 because
> we want it to override the values set by -O6)? I haven't tried it for
> a while, but at least in an older egcs snapshot (somewhere between
> 1.1.2 and gcc 2.95), it worked (optimize as much as possible, but
> value size over speed).
Order doesn't matter, since -Os is more like an optimization flag then
a level (should really have been called -foptimize-size IMHO). It
doesn't disable/enable anything else apart from forcing the minimum O
level to 2.
--
Dan Nelson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
