[M3devel] more combinations to test?

[Tony Hosking]

I think all of this is worthwhile.  Probably enough to test -O and -O3.

On 12 Sep 2010, at 18:50, Jay K wrote:

> 
> I'd be super nice if we had some automation around:
>   testing cm3cg -O, -O1, -O2, -O3 
>    m3cc/gcc/configure -enable-checking
>    m3cc/gcc/configure -enable-checking=all
> 
> I'd settle for just -O3 and -enable-checking=all.
> 
> I have a suspicion that if -enable-checking=all was done all along,
> we wouldn't have such problems with volatile and optimization.
> 
> 
> Currently cm3cg built with -enable-checking hits lots of problems,
> or at least many instances of a few problems. For now I change
> them warnings while I work through them.
> 
> 
> Having Hudson do this, and having then the record logged would be good.
>   (It is a large log/record, as we hit many warnings per file, mostly
>   converting integer types.)
> 
> On the other hand, I'm not sure any of this is worth much.
> cm3cg -O3 is noticable slow to run.
> Possibly more time is spent in it than it saves.
> And -enable-checking maybe only fixes things that matter if optimizing -- based
> on what has historically worked.
> 
> 
>  - Jay
> 
> 
> 
>