On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 8:04 PM, David Kirkby<david.kir...@onetel.net> wrote: > > 2009/7/29 William Stein <wst...@gmail.com>: >> >> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 6:56 PM, Nick Alexander<ncalexan...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> It feels to me as though higher value of SAGE_DEBUG should do more >>>> debugging, not less. There could be two variables: SAGE_DEBUG and >>>> SAGE_OPTIMIZE, each of which could be set to various levels... >>> >>> +1 to names revealing intent! And +1 to having debug info *on by >>> default*. >>> >>> Nick >>> >> >> We should just mimic GCC and have both flags. SAGE_DEBUG should only >> impact whether or not "-g" is given. SAGE_OPTIMIZE should only impact >> how the "-O" flag (or equivalent) is given. Otherwise things are too >> confusing and messed up (as in all proposals above). >> >> The default would be SAGE_DEBUG=true and SAGE_OPTIMIZE=true. >> To get "-O0" one would do SAGE_OPTIMIZE=false. To get rid of all >> debug symbols, one does SAGE_DEBUG=false. >> >> -- William > > From what I have seen, SAGE_DEBUG was 0 or 1, not 'true' or 'false'. > Most lanauges would tend to use 'TRUE' rather than 'true' >
In Python it is "True". In Magma it is "true". A lot of the Sage flags are "yes". > Would SAGE_OPTIMIZE not be better being 0, 1 ,2, 3, 4 or 5? with a > default of say 3, correspondign to the optimisation level of the > compiler? I'm not sure. William --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
