Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 12:24:10 -0500 (CDT)
From: Aaron Ucko <UCKO AT VAX1 DOT ROCKHURST DOT EDU>
Subject: Re: gcc = gcc -O2 ?
To: eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il
Cc: djgpp AT sun DOT soe DOT clarkson DOT edu
Organization: Rockhurst College; Kansas City, MO

>>>> This came up because someone thought that most PC compilers, by
>>>> default, optimized, so gcc should also.
>>>
>>>I don't think this is so.  What compilers are these?
>> At least TC and QC; presumably others also exhibit this behavior.
>
>Don't know about QC, but TC defaults to no optimization (I'm
>talking about tcc; I don't know what is the default configuration
>of the IDE in TC).  Every command-line compiler for DOS I know
>defaults to no optimization, AFAIK.
Whoops! TC _does_ default to no optimization.  However, it provides
a way to create a configuration file and select optimization to
be the default that way...Is it possible to do that sort of thing
with lib/specs?  If so, how?

--- Aaron Ucko (ucko AT vax1 DOT rockhurst DOT edu; finger for PGP public key) -=- httyp!
-=*=-Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.-=*=-
Geek code 2.1 [finger hayden AT vax1 DOT mankato DOT msus DOT edu for explanation]: 
 GCS/M/S d(-) H s g+ p? !au a-- w+ v+ C++(+++)>++++ UL++(-)(S+)>++++ P++ 
 L+(++) 3(-) E-(----) !N>++ K- W-(---) M-(--) V(--) po-(--) Y+(++) t(+) !5 j R 
 G tv--(-) b+++ !D(--) B--(---) e>++++(*) u++(@) h!() f(+) r-(--)>+++ n+(-) y?