On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 05:00:10PM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote: > Richard Guenther <rguent...@suse.de> writes: > > > > The wish for more granular and thus smaller debug information (things like > > -gfunction-arguments which would properly show parameter values > > for backtraces) was brought up. We agree that this should be addressed at a > > tools level, like in strip, not in the compiler. > > Is that really the right level? In my experience (very roughly) -g can turn > gcc from > CPU bound to IO bound (especially considering distributed compiling > appraches), > and dropping unnecessary information in external tools would make the IO > penalty even > worse.
Certainly life can suck when building large C++ apps with -g in an NFS environment. Assuming we can generate tons of stuff and strip it later might not be best.
