Robert Dewar <de...@adacore.com> writes: > Sebastian Pop wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 08:12, Robert Dewar <de...@adacore.com> wrote: >>>> What would we have to do to make PPL and CLooG required to build GCC? >>> Why would that be desirable? Seems to me the current situation is >>> clearly preferable. >> To enable loop transforms in -O3. > > To me, you would have to show very clearly a significant performance > gain for typical applications to justify the impact of adding > PPL and CLooG. I don't see it. If you want these transformations > you can get them, why go to all this disruptive effort for the > default optimization case?
I think his point was that they would be only widely used if they were part of -O3 because likely most users are not willing to set individual -f optimization flags. -Andi -- a...@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
