On 9/13/2012 9:38 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 09:33:20AM -0400, Robert Dewar wrote:
On 9/13/2012 8:00 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
Because doing so would create code generation differences -g vs. -g0.
Sometimes I wonder whether the insistence on -g not changing code
generation is warranted. In practice, gdb for me is so weak in handling
It is. IMHO the most important reason is not that somebody would build
first with just -O2 and then later on to debug the code would build it again
with -g -O2 and hope the code is the same, but by making sure -g vs. -g0
doesn't change generate code we ensure -g doesn't pessimize the generated
code, and really many people compile even production code with -g -O2
or similar. The debug info is then either stripped, or stripped into
separate files/not shipped or only optionally shipped with the product.
Jakub
Sure, it is obvious that you don't want -g to affect -O1 or -O2 code,
but I think if you have -Og (if and when we have that), it would not
be a bad thing for -g to affect that. I can even imagine that what
-Og means is -O1 if you don't have -g, and something good for
debugging if you do have -g.
