GCC optimization bugs -- still there or a historic artifact?

[Paul Seniura]

Hi,

> [snip]
> > And as for PPC, I've compiled things as high as -O5,
> > which is its limit I believe. ;) 
> [snip]
>
> hm, no docs for -On, n > 3 at http://xrl.us/brh2 .  Looking at the
>     code: http://xrl.us/brh5 (search for 'optimize >= 3'), I don't see any
>     evidence that -O5 is different from -O3. Though apple gcc is somewhat
>     changed from fsf gcc, so maybe apple gcc does something different.

(kinda o.t.)

Oh Yes I'm quite sure of it -- Apple and IBM are working on
gcc and feeding the changes back to the GNU teams, who are
probably swamped. ;)  So I bet it won't be seen in gcc34
yet, tho.  And this work may also be going into IBM's
'enterprise' compiler (the US$3K version ;) .

I believe the man page for gcc on Panther does show what
the levels do at -O4 and -O5.  (My G4 is at home, TPTB
would have a hissy-fit if I brought it in.  I have the
Darwin CD for i386 based on Panther, here at work; maybe
gcc is installed from it, and I can try posting its manpage
somehow.)  I have a feeling the higher -O levels won't show
until/unless gcc itself is compiled for ppc platforms,
y'know #ifdefs in the src.  Else the patches for the GNU
teams are in a long line for review.

They're doing the work because IBM *really* want the G5 to
be very-well supported.  And not just for Apple.  You see
Sony & M$ have announced their next game consoles will be
based on the G5.  I'm hoping all gcc users will eventually
see the benefits of their work.

  --  thx, Paul Seniura.