On 2018-11-07 11:18 p.m., Nadav Amit wrote: >> Apparently gcc will treat them like basic blocks and possibly move them around. > > Maybe it is possible to break the compilation of each object into two > stages: first, compile the source without assembly, and then take the > generated .s file and assemble it with the .s file of the macros. > > Does it sounds as something that may work? I guess it should only be done > when distcc is used. In theory it would at least allow the compile step to be distributed, the assembly step would still have to be done locally... It'd be better than nothing, I guess. It'd also be difficult to know when distribution is being done and that it's necessary to split the steps. We'd have to add an environment variable or something and users would need to know they have to set it when using a distributed compile. Logan
