https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114262
--- Comment #7 from LIU Hao ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #6)
> > Note GCC has not retuned its -Os heurstics for a long time because it has
> > been
> > decent enough for most folks and corner cases like this is almost never come
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114262
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
> Note GCC has not retuned its -Os heurstics for a long time because it has been
> decent enough for most folks and corner cases like this is almost never come
> up.
There were quite few changes to -Os heurist
> Note GCC has not retuned its -Os heurstics for a long time because it has been
> decent enough for most folks and corner cases like this is almost never come
> up.
There were quite few changes to -Os heuristics :)
One of bigger challenges is that we do see more and more C++ code built
with -Os wh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114262
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to LIU Hao from comment #4)
> The only difference between the C99 `extern inline` and C++ `extern inline`
> is that the C++ external definition is COMDAT.
Well not really. comdat changes heurstic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114262
--- Comment #4 from LIU Hao ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> It looks like it has been this way since r0-37737-g4838c5ee553f06 (2001) (or
> rather that is when it was used by the tree inline; I don't want to dig
> further back t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114262
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
--- Comment #3 from Andre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114262
--- Comment #2 from LIU Hao ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> I thought it was documented that gnu_inline also causes always_inline if
> optimization is turned on but I can't seem to find that ...
Is that the case in GCC source?
