> > Look from what we're starting: > > > > << > > @item -funroll-loops > > @opindex funroll-loops > > Unroll loops whose number of iterations can be determined at compile > > time or upon entry to the loop. @option{-funroll-loops} implies > > @option{-frerun-cse-after-loop}. This option makes code larger, > > and may or may not make it run faster. > > > > @item -funroll-all-loops > > @opindex funroll-all-loops > > Unroll all loops, even if their number of iterations is uncertain when > > the loop is entered. This usually makes programs run more slowly. > > @option{-funroll-all-loops} implies the same options as > > @option{-funroll-loops}, > > >> > > > > It could gain a few more paragraphs written by knowledgeable people. > > And expanding documentation doesn't introduce regressions :). > > but also does not make anyone actually use the options. Nobody reads > the documention. Of course, this is a bit overstatement, but with a > few exceptions, people in general do not enable non-default flags.
I don't think this is fair. Most people don't read the docs because they don't care about performance, but most people who develop code that spends a lot of CPU cycles actually read the docs at least up to loop unrolling. BTW there is even www.funroll-loops.org ;) The content however can be found only in wayback http://web.archive.org/web/20060513022941/http://www.funroll-loops.org/ Honza > > Zdenek