mehdi_amini added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D28404#641538, @probinson wrote:
> > - optnone isn't *really* no optimizations: clearly this is true, but then > > neither is -O0. We run the always inliner, a couple of other passes, and we > > run several parts of the code generators optimizer. I understand why > > optnone deficiencies (ie, too many optimizations) might be frustrating, but > > having *more users* seems likely to make this *better*. > > We have picked all the low-hanging fruit there, and probably some > medium-hanging fruit. Mehdi did have the misunderstanding that optnone == > -O0 and that I think was worth correcting. As I stand right now, there hasn't been any correction. I still consider the fact that `optnone` wouldn't produce the "same" result (modulo corner cases around `merging global variables` for instance) as O0 a bug that need to be fixed. (Disabling passes for compile time at O0 stays I compile time improvement, I never suggested to stop doing this...) https://reviews.llvm.org/D28404 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
