------- Additional Comments From gary at intrepid dot com 2005-03-18 16:16 ------- from http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-03/msg00491.html
I think that the switch name -fkeep-static-consts might be more consistenly named if it was given the opposite sense and named something like -fdelete-unused-static-consts. The idea here is that by asserting the switch a particular optimization is _enabled_. Thus the optimizations performed at each level can be consistently enumerated by asserting a particular set of switches which enable specific optimizations. This would change the present user interface, however, I doubt that anyone is making extensive use of the current interface because at present only -fno-keep-static-consts, asserted at -O0 (no optimization), actually changes the default behavior of the compiler. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20319