:: Zach Loafman writes: >> Yes... I saw a few Makefiles using -O9 and -O10.
> You should never blindly use high optimization levels. For one, there > is nothing wired above -O3, so -O9 and -O10 both fall back to -O3, > IIRC. Yes, I think the reason to use -O10 is to use the highest optimization level, even when a new version of gcc offers -O4 or -O5... > For another, -O2 is considered for many applications the > maximum safe optimization level, so recompiling all of your packages > with -O3 might not be the best idea. (I know I've had programs I've > written die on -O3 that work on -O2). -O2 is considered to be the > "production code where you don't care about length of compile time" > option. Yes, but you may want to use those with applications which do not crash and are CPU-intensive (mp3 or ogg-vorbis encoders are a good example). Now, I don't know why gcc will fail to do loop unrolling safely. :-( J. -- Jeronimo Pellegrini Institute of Computing - Unicamp - Brazil http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~jeronimo mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
