From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Cc: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [22.1.90]: Point before start of properties
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 10:22:46 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E1JTIgg-00024f-G0@fencepost.gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <uoda7mkwv.fsf@gnu.org> (message from Eli Zaretskii on Sat, 23 Feb 2008 23:18:24 +0200)
No, not really. -O1 disables ``expensive optimizations'',
i.e. optimizations that use significant portions of processor time.
Thus, which optimizations are selected for inclusion in -O1 has
nothing to do with which ones defeat debugging, and the fact that -O1
compiled programs are easier to debug is a pure coincidence. I'm
quite sure several important optimizations could be added to -O1
without any significant effect on debuggability.
In practice, though, does it really make a difference?
Why won't using -O1 be good for you?
Do you really need the extra performance of those
optimizations that could be added?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-02-24 15:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-02-08 16:35 [22.1.90]: Point before start of properties Marshall, Simon
2008-02-10 3:26 ` Stefan Monnier
2008-02-10 15:22 ` Chong Yidong
2008-02-12 17:52 ` Marshall, Simon
2008-02-12 18:32 ` Stefan Monnier
2008-02-13 10:13 ` Marshall, Simon
2008-02-18 19:52 ` Stefan Monnier
2008-02-19 10:37 ` Marshall, Simon
2008-02-19 16:00 ` Stefan Monnier
2008-02-19 17:23 ` Marshall, Simon
2008-02-19 17:31 ` David Kastrup
2008-02-20 9:44 ` Marshall, Simon
2008-02-19 21:59 ` Stefan Monnier
2008-02-20 11:31 ` Marshall, Simon
2008-02-20 17:17 ` Stefan Monnier
2008-02-20 19:40 ` Eli Zaretskii
2008-02-21 9:16 ` Richard Stallman
2008-02-21 16:02 ` Stefan Monnier
2008-02-22 3:16 ` Stephen J. Turnbull
2008-02-22 15:18 ` [OT] Deugging optimized code (was: [22.1.90]: Point before start of properties) Stefan Monnier
2008-02-22 15:41 ` Andreas Schwab
2008-02-22 22:20 ` Stephen J. Turnbull
2008-02-22 16:31 ` [22.1.90]: Point before start of properties Eli Zaretskii
2008-02-22 16:27 ` Eli Zaretskii
2008-02-22 22:09 ` Miles Bader
2008-02-23 19:29 ` Richard Stallman
2008-02-23 21:18 ` Eli Zaretskii
2008-02-24 15:22 ` Richard Stallman [this message]
2008-02-24 19:59 ` Eli Zaretskii
2008-02-25 10:57 ` Richard Stallman
2008-02-25 15:55 ` Stefan Monnier
2008-02-24 20:36 ` Tom Tromey
2008-02-25 10:57 ` Richard Stallman
2008-02-21 22:27 ` Richard Stallman
[not found] ` <6EE216E1AA959543A555C60FF34FB76702B2DB02@maileube01.misys.global.ad>
2008-02-19 14:45 ` Marshall, Simon
2008-02-19 23:09 ` Richard Stallman
2008-02-10 18:42 ` Richard Stallman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=E1JTIgg-00024f-G0@fencepost.gnu.org \
--to=rms@gnu.org \
--cc=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).