probinson added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D28404#640682, @mehdi_amini wrote:
> > I'm now thinking along the lines of a `-foptimize-off` flag (bikesheds > > welcome) which would set the default for the pragma to 'off'. How is that > > different than what you wanted for `-O0`? It is defined in terms of an > > existing pragma, which is WAY easier to explain and WAY easier to > > implement. And, it still lets us say that `-c -O0 -flto` is a mistake, if > > that seems like a useful thing to say. > > Well -O0 being actually "disable optimization", I found "way easier" to > handle everything the same way (pragma, command line, etc.). I kind of find > it confusing for the user to differentiate `-O0` from `-foptimize=off`. What > is supposed to change between the two? There is a pedantic difference, rooted in the still-true factoid that O0 != optnone. If we redefine LTO as "Link Time Operation" (rather than Optimization; see my reply to Duncan) then `-O0 -flto` is no longer an oxymoron, but using the attribute to imply the optimization level is still not good fidelity to what the user asked for. https://reviews.llvm.org/D28404 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
