On Wed, 2023-08-02 at 13:16 -0400, Bradley Lucier wrote:
> On 8/1/23 6:08 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > FWIW I added it to support Scheme from libgccjit;
>
> Do you know of any Scheme using libgccjit?
I don't.
It's not Scheme, but in case it's relevant, Emacs is doing ahead-of-
time compilation
On 8/1/23 6:08 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
FWIW I added it to support Scheme from libgccjit;
Do you know of any Scheme using libgccjit?
BTW, I tried to build mainline with --enable-coverage to see which code
is executed with -foptimize-sibling-calls, but bootstrap fails with
On 8/1/23 6:08 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
Or from libgccjit. FWIW I added it to support Scheme from libgccjit;
see this patch kit:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-05/msg01287.html
Perhaps there's a case for a frontend attribute for this.
Dave
Thanks. I thought a front-end warning
On Tue, 2023-08-01 at 20:20 +0200, Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc wrote:
>
> > > The Gambit Scheme->C compiler has an option to generate more
> > > efficient
> > > code if it knows that all tail and sibling calls in the generated
> > > C
> > > code will be optimized. If gcc does not, however, optimize
On 8/1/23 12:51 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
How is it possible to write valid C that is correct only if some optimization
is done?
Perhaps "incorrect" was the wrong word. If sibling-call optimization is
not done, then perhaps the program will blow out the stack, which would
not happen if the
>> The Gambit Scheme->C compiler has an option to generate more efficient
>> code if it knows that all tail and sibling calls in the generated C
>> code will be optimized. If gcc does not, however, optimize a tail or
>> sibling call, the generated C code may be incorrect (depending on
>>
> The Gambit Scheme->C compiler has an option to generate more efficient
> code if it knows that all tail and sibling calls in the generated C
> code will be optimized. If gcc does not, however, optimize a tail or
> sibling call, the generated C code may be incorrect (depending on
>
I'm puzzled.
The fundamental rule of optimization is that it doesn't change the (defined)
semantics of the program. How is it possible to write valid C that is correct
only if some optimization is done?
In other words, if it matters whether an optimization is done or not, that
suggests to me
