On Mon, 9 Apr 2018, Martin Sebor wrote:

> On 04/09/2018 01:36 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Sun, 8 Apr 2018, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > 
> > > While updating the -Wrestrict option to mention that it works
> > > best not just with -O2 but also at higher optimization levels
> > > I looked around for other options that might benefit from
> > > a similar clarification.  I found a few inlining options that
> > > only mention -O2 but that (according to -Q --help=optimizers)
> > > are enabled at other levels as well.  The attached patch
> > > changes the manual to reflect that.
> > 
> > OK.
> I committed it earlier today in r259250.
> > 
> > > Given the large number of options I didn't take the time to
> > > check all optimization options so there could others that could
> > > stand to be similarly improved if we want to be 100% accurate.
> > > If that is, in fact, what we want then we might want to script
> > > this.
> > 
> > Yeah, note we now have -Og and -Ofast as well...
> Right, those aren't mentioned.  With so many flavors of -O does
> enumerating them all for each optimization option still make
> sense?  I wonder if this could this be generated by some script
> instead (it would probably have to be presented in the form of
> a table but that might actually make things easier to find).

I think it would be reasonable to say "level two or higher" and
in the -On docs specify what "level" means (two is -O2 or -Os).
Then say "lever two or higher but not for -Os", thus enumerate
exceptions instead.

Another phrase would be "enabled by default if optimizing" for
all the passes we enable at all -On but -O0.


Reply via email to