On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 09:06:15AM +0200, Peter Bex wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 12:08:04PM +1200, Evan Hanson wrote:
> > I suppose now would be a good time to discuss whether we should (1) add
> > any warnings to this pass, for example when one of these FFI arguments
> > is known to have the wrong type, and (2) try to enable the pass for
> > optimization levels < 5, as both lfa2 and clustering are disabled with
> > "XXX" annotations in chicken.scm. Thoughts?
> I think this makes sense.  I suppose they were commented out initially
> because the new passes might break things, but they've been in there for
> many years now.  I'd prefer we add them all to -O3 and higher for now.
> Then, if they cause no problems we can move them up to -O2 and perhaps
> -O1 if we're feeling confident enough.

Also, should we wait until 5.1 with this?  Considering we've made so
many changes already, it makes sense to let things settle before enabling
these optimizations.  That way, if stuff breaks we have less places to
look for potential reasons.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Chicken-hackers mailing list

Reply via email to