duncan.coutts: > On Wed, 2010-05-05 at 21:24 +1000, Roman Leshchinskiy wrote: > > Whenever I do cabal sdist on one of my projects, I get this warning: > > > > Distribution quality warnings: > > 'ghc-options: -O2' is rarely needed. Check that it is giving a real benefit > > and not just imposing longer compile times on your users. > > > > This finally got me curious and I did a nofib run to compare -O to > > -O2. The results are below (this is with the current HEAD). > > > > Is there a real-world example of -O2 causing significantly longer > > compile times without providing a real benefit? If not, would it > > perhaps make sense for Cabal to use -O2 by default or even for GHC to > > make the two flags equivalent? > > It should be -O1 for default/balanced optimisations and -O2 for things > involving a bigger tradeoff in terms of code size or compile time. so > any optimisations in -O2 that GHC HQ believe are a no-brainer for the > majority of packages should be moved into -O1.
+1 It might be a good time to revise the set of "balanced" optimizations available at -O1 (-O) level. _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
