"[email protected]" <[email protected]> writes: > On Sep 19, 2011, at 5:22 PM, Neil Puttock wrote: > >> On 19 September 2011 16:16, David Kastrup <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> The debug symbols should not affect code speed, and they are present in >>> the unoptimized build, anyway, unless you are talking about something >>> completely different from what I think you do. I find it disturbing, >>> however, that our default build uses NDEBUG to disable assertions. >>> Under normal circumstances, assertions have negligible speed impact. It >>> makes little sense to restrict their use explicitly to non-optimized >>> builds. In particular since it makes it quite unlikely that one can >>> catch Heisenbugs with assertions: they often go away with significant >>> code changes, and switching optimization off most certainly _is_ a >>> significant change. >> >> I didn't say that the debug symbols affect code speed. >> >> The unoptimized binary is much slower, at least on my system. >> >> Mike is suggesting we stop shipping optimized binaries. >> > > I've put up a new patch that checks for cyclic dependencies in the > regtests - does this seem like a better approach?
It does not really touch the issue of using NDEBUG on default builds. For what it is worth: I think that Lilypond is the only project I remember working with where NDEBUG (and consequently disabled assertions) are the default. This particular issue is concerned about regtests/--disable-optimising, so I can't quite see how the cyclic dependency patch would be concerned unless the check is only done with NDEBUG set, at considerable cost. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
