From:	"Alexei A. Frounze" <alex DOT fru AT mtu-net DOT ru>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: inefficiency of GCC output code & -O problem
Date:	Fri, 14 Apr 2000 01:10:31 +0400
Organization:	MTU-Intel ISP
Lines:	18
Message-ID:	<38F637C7.4F4ECB6@mtu-net.ru>
References:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1000413112851 DOT 28180G-100000 AT is> <38F6137B DOT 47481761 AT mtu-net DOT ru> <38f6342c DOT 52524603 AT news DOT freeserve DOT net>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	ppp103-131.dialup.mtu-net.ru
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Trace:	gavrilo.mtu.ru 955660583 71604 212.188.103.131 (13 Apr 2000 21:16:23 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:	usenet-abuse AT mtu DOT ru
NNTP-Posting-Date:	13 Apr 2000 21:16:23 GMT
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.61 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language:	en,ru
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Steamer wrote:
> The bugs in your code are in the interface between the C and the inline
> assembly.  They may not cause a problem if you don't use -O2, but they
> surely will as soon as the optimizer starts trying to rearrange things,
> remove redundant instructions, avoid unnecessary memory access, etc.

Thus design of the optimizer is buggy as well. :))

Remember, someone pointed out that AS doesn't recognize extra parentheses? So,
this is also a problem of interface between GCC and AS.

bye.
Alexei A. Frounze
-----------------------------------------
Homepage: http://alexfru.chat.ru
Mirror:   http://members.xoom.com/alexfru

- Raw text -