OK. You are right, my question was not so clear. I provide an example to better explain : -giving a random sequence (among On options controllable through compiler switches): -foption1 -fno-option2 -foption3 -I call this sequence sample_sequence -I note by FNO-O1: the list of optimizations of O1 that are controllable through compiler switches. I turn off all of them. FNO-O2 = -fno-O1Option1 -fno-O1Option2 -fno-O1Option3 ... -fno-O1OptionN -I note by FNO-O2: the list of optimizations of O1 that are controllable through compiler switches. I turn off all of them. FNO-O2 = -fno-O2Option1 -fno-O2Option2 -fno-O2Option3 ... -fno-O2OptionN TEST 1: -O1 + FNO-O1 (disable O1 optimizations that are controllable through compiler switches) + sample_sequence* IS IT EQUAL TO* -O2 + FNO-O2 (disable O2 optimizations that are controllable through compiler switches) + sample_sequence I would like to know of default optimizations in O1 = O2. The same question for O3, OS and Ofast. Does Os for example introduce more default optimizations than O1 (of course by considering that all optimizations that are controllable through compiler switches, are disabled ) Hope that it is more clear. Thanks -- View this message in context: http://gcc.1065356.n5.nabble.com/Question-about-default-optimizations-tp1208211p1208683.html Sent from the gcc - Help mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
