On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 7:42 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 02:05:42PM -0000, Rafael Espindola wrote: >> Author: rafael >> Date: Mon Aug 26 09:05:41 2013 >> New Revision: 189218 >> >> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=189218&view=rev >> Log: >> Simplify now that -O4 just maps to -O3 and -O is an alias of -O2. > > I find that a bit surprising, given that -O should mean -O1. > Daniel -- you changed it to mean -O2 in r82131. Any idea why?
+1 yikes! "-O" should always be a synonym for "-O1". People depend on this. I don't have a dog in the -O4 bikeshed, but FWIW my opinion is that -O<any number> should be silently accepted (and saturate). I liked being able to pass "gcc -O99" to mean "Give me everything you've got", without having to think about "ooh, version 42.7 only goes up to -O3, and then 42.8 has -O5, and then 42.9 is back to -O4.5..." Of course adding an "-Omax" would also deal with that use-case, if people even thought that was important to deal with. my $.02, –Arthur _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
