On Nov 23, 2009, at 9:11 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: >> I personally think -march=native is not the right default, but I see >> the arguments for it. I guess the argument for making it the default >> on Linux/BSDs is that many users build their own software? > > Yes, that is the biggest argument. The other issue is that the normal > fallback is plain i386 which lacks SSE2. We should default to at *least* > pentium4 if you don't want native. However, I don't see why native is bad. > We should allow (though not a priority) clang to be configured to default to > a specific target which may not be the native one at all, this mechanism > should handle the case where I want to build for i386 on my penryn.
Personally I like -march=native as a default with the option of configuring for a non-native default if you want. OS or tools vendors can easily do the latter, but random users won't get a virtually useless architecture if they forget. Since the question was asked newer gccs do default to march=native if they're configured for an x86 or x86_64 cpu. -eric _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
