On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Jonathan Schleifer <[email protected]> wrote: > Am 14.05.2012 um 20:34 schrieb John McCall: > >> If the GNU runtime supports emitting direct references to the class, why is >> a command-line option necessary? > > The GNU runtime does not. The GNUstep runtime does and mine does. > > It needs to be an option as this is not even part of the new, non-fragile > ABI. So when compiling against the GNUstep or my runtime, this flag can be > used to directly reference classes - this makes for more than a 2x speedup in > real world application. This also means this is independent on whether you > use the fragile or non-fragile ABI. You might want to use the fragile ABI > with -fobjc-direct-class-refs for maximum performance. > >> I am opposed to providing an ever-expanding spectrum of command line flags — >> particularly driver flags! — to slightly tweak the ABI. > > Then we need a module for each runtime so we have multiple -f*-runtime. > CGObjCGNU.cpp would need to be splitted into CGObjCGNU.cpp, CGObjCGNUstep.cpp > and CGObjCObjFW.cpp for -fgnu-runtime, -fgnustep-runtime and -fobjfw-runtime > - for just a few lines of differences. Is this really better?
I'm not following your objection here: the organization of the code and the user-visible command-line options are completely independent. -Eli _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
