> > You're asking the compiler to "pull out all the stops" to algorithmically
> > optimize code the programmer clearly did not intend for such optimization.
> > The programmer is [supposed to be] intelligent, the compiler is not. And,
> > as I'm sure we've all seen, some programmers abuse the language trying to
> > do their own "optimizations". That's why new version of the compiler
> > sometimes will not work with some coding practices. For example, "Please
> > note the warning under -fgcse about invoking -O2 on programs that use
> > computed gotos."
> whilst I agree that increasing optimization does sometimes lead to
> problems, I think you are perhaps missing something important: the
> flags used by the package developer.
You're right. I was trying to address the more general proposition of adding
optimizations when building. IMO, it's generally not a good idea.
Rogers' Second Law: "Everything you do communicates."
(I do not personally endorse any additions after this line. TANSTAAFL :-)
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Do not top post on this list.
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?