Re: gcc 3.3 / i386 / -O2 question

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: Luca Benini <lbenini@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: gcc 3.3 / i386 / -O2 question
From: Robert Dewar <dewar@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 07:45:01 -0500
Cc: Dave Korn <dk@xxxxxxxxxx>, "'Gerald Pfeifer'" <gerald@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Beschorner Daniel'" <Daniel.Beschorner@xxxxxxxxxx>, gcc@xxxxxxxxxxx, gcc-help@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <419B38B5.1070005@csr.unibo.it>
References: <NUTMEG0wzGDCvPeSHvn00000800@NUTMEG.CAM.ARTIMI.COM> <419B3277.9060209@csr.unibo.it> <419B36CA.4060400@gnat.com> <419B38B5.1070005@csr.unibo.it>
Sender: gcc-help-owner@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913)

Luca Benini wrote:

But in this case the asm produced are not the same.


Can you say what you mean here, certainly you expect
optimization to change the "asm produced"

References:
- RE: gcc 3.3 / i386 / -O2 question
  - From: Dave Korn
- Re: gcc 3.3 / i386 / -O2 question
  - From: Luca Benini
- Re: gcc 3.3 / i386 / -O2 question
  - From: Robert Dewar
- Re: gcc 3.3 / i386 / -O2 question
  - From: Luca Benini

Prev by Date: RE: gcc 3.3 / i386 / -O2 question
Next by Date: Re: gcc 3.3 / i386 / -O2 question
Previous by thread: Re: gcc 3.3 / i386 / -O2 question
Next by thread: Re: gcc 3.3 / i386 / -O2 question
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Linux C Programming] [Linux Kernel] [eCos] [Fedora Development] [Fedora Announce] [Autoconf] [The DWARVES Debugging Tools] [Yosemite Campsites] [Yosemite News] [Linux GCC]

Powered by Linux