Re: Baby X is bor nagain

On 2024-06-28, bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:

On 28/06/2024 04:23, Kaz Kylheku wrote:

On 2024-06-27, bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:

And for most of /my/ compiles, the code produced by gcc-O0 is fast
enough. It also about the same speed as code produced by one of my
compilers.
>
So I tend to use it when I want the extra speed, or other compilers
don't work, or when a particular app only builds with that compiler.
>
Otherwise the extra overheads are not worth the bother.

 
How good are your diagnostics compared to GCC -O2, plus -Wall and -W?

>
Using products like tcc doesn't mean never using gcc. (Especially on
Linux where you will have it installed anyway.)
>
You can use the latter to do extra, periodic checks that the simpler
compiler may have missed, or to produce faster production builds.
>
But gcc is not needed for routine compilation.

Catching common bugs in routine compilation is better than once
a month.

You could be wasting time debugging something where GCC would have told
you right away you have something uninitialized or whatever.

If you have a CI pipeline, you should at least have it run the
good-diagnostics compiler, so it catches problems when developers
submit code.

--
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca