On Mon, 2008-10-13 at 11:52 +0200, Bernd Jendrissek wrote: > On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 8:46 PM, Peter Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > For example, with some macros defined to pick out the syntax understood > > by any specific compilers, we could add branch prediction information to > > certain hot-spot routines. > > I'd rather just use -fprofile-generate and -fprofile-use instead of > adding more tokens to the source.
Doesn't this rely on running the program to generate profiling data, ensuring the run fully exercises the various code-paths, then re-compiling? This is the kind of information, for the _really_ hot routines, which the developers could profile and add. FWIW, I tried - and it didn't seem to make much difference. Perhaps GCC had made the right decision anyway - or the difference was so small to be lost in the noise. Best wishes, -- Peter Clifton Electrical Engineering Division, Engineering Department, University of Cambridge, 9, JJ Thomson Avenue, Cambridge CB3 0FA Tel: +44 (0)7729 980173 - (No signal in the lab!) _______________________________________________ geda-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev
