Optimization (was Re: volatile)
Every system needs one
terry at wsccs.UUCP
Tue May 17 14:11:34 AEST 1988
In article <1988May4.195636.1801 at utzoo.uucp>, henry at utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
| [begin snotty tone :-)] Well, I suppose people who make errors, and thus
| need debuggers, would have to worry about such things, but I fail to see
| any reason why *I* should eat my hat... [end tone] :-) :-)
|
| More seriously, yes, debugging optimized code can be a real pain. I don't
| think even the Mips people, who put in a lot of effort on things like this,
| have a debugger that can explain to you what the optimized code is doing.
| You just have to tone down the optimization for debugging, and pray that
| there aren't any serious differences of opinion between you and the optimizer
| when it comes time to "compile for production".
Ok. You can wash the condiments off your hat. ;-)
The point is that there shouldn't be differences of opinion in "good code",
and anywhere that such a thing is possible is an example of a bad assumption,
given that the code conforms to the same standard as the compiler.
A bad assumption is a compiler bug. If a compiler can't compile conforming
code, it isn't a conforming compiler.
terry at wsccs
More information about the Comp.lang.c
mailing list