------- Comment #2 from mattst88 at gmail dot com 2010-05-13 21:40 -------
(In reply to comment #1)
> What do you mean by "bad"? If the code isn't correct, "wrong" is better
> suited; if it is suboptimal, "poor" is better suited.
>
> If the latter, it's expected that -O1 generates poorer code than -O2/-O3/-Os.
Yes, poor is a better word.
And by poor, I mean that gcc produces many superfluous loads and stores and
even a branch.
--
mattst88 at gmail dot com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Summary|gcc produces bad code at -O1|gcc produces poor code at -
| |O1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44123
