https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120689
--- Comment #6 from Alex Mohr ---
Beauty! Thank you!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120689
Bug ID: 120689
Summary: Codegen optimization regression passing struct in
register in gcc 10+ on x86-64.
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111243
--- Comment #15 from Alex Mohr ---
Thank you Richard B, Richard G, Xi, Jonathan, Jakub, and Eric for all the great
info. Much appreciated.
With more experience using '-Og -fno-inline' I've found that sometimes
inspecting local variables doesn'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111243
--- Comment #10 from Alex Mohr ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #9)
> I believe the only real issue is imprecise documentation: "It is a better
> choice than -O0" has some caveats and it's not always true.
Is there a way to explicitly en
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111243
--- Comment #8 from Alex Mohr ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5)
> A 4x slowdown isn't really acceptable IMHO. At that point, why not just use
> -O0 instead?
I've been using -O0 for years. I was trying to move to -Og because of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111243
--- Comment #2 from Alex Mohr ---
Thanks much for looking at this, Richard.
I definitely understand what you're driving at with regard to stepping into
lots of C++ abstraction stuff. But I think it gets blurry trying to
distinguish what's inte
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111243
Bug ID: 111243
Summary: The -Og option inlines functions, making for a poor
debugging experience.
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
