On Mon, 17 Sep 2007, Eric Blake wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
According to Thomas Dickey on 9/17/2007 6:23 AM:
It's more than that. Setting the flags to -g is a policy decision made
in the mid-90's based on the claim that setting the optimization flag
in any compiler other than gcc would expose bugs in that compiler.
(the claim of course is incorrect, but there's no point in discussing it
on this mailing list)
I agree that the claim is probably not true, especially since compiler
technology has improved in the meantime. However, this IS the appropriate
list for discussing the issue. Please, feel free to post examples and/or
patches of what you think can be improved, rather than assuming,
pessimistically, that we don't care to hear what you have to say.
Furthermore, I don't see this claim written in the manual, which means
It was what David MacKenzie told me (and even that long ago, my experience
- comparing with vendor's compilers to Solaris, SunOS, AIX, HPUX - the
most likely compiler to be a candidate for suppressing optimization was
gcc(*)).
He produced no examples to support his statement at that time, nor have I
seen any reliable reports on this mailing list.
(unsurprisingly enough, the same assertion has been repeatedly made on
this mailing list - perhaps someone could find a few of those ;-)
(*) watching bug reports in FreeBSD regarding gcc 4.1, it appears to be
still the case (ymmv)
--
Thomas E. Dickey
http://invisible-island.net
ftp://invisible-island.net
_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
Autoconf@xxxxxxx
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
